Slashdot Mirror

Take a look at Volution from Caldera. It isn't all open source, but it's major components are.

Take a look at Caldera's Volution Messaging Server

It isn't entirely open-source, but it's major components are.

I think it is fair to mention Caldera's Volution Messaging Server, which is marketed as a Linux-based, low cost alternative to Exchange. What is interesting is that a large part of this product is actually open source: Postfix, Cyrus-IMAP, OpenLDAP, OpenSSL, HORDE/IMP. Caldera's contribution is arguably valuable: they tied the whole mess together, added a user-friendly interface (integration and user friendliness is something open source projects are often horrible at) and added Outlook-compatible calendaring. Still, what is notable is that the open source world is already a long way there. All it needs is packaging and calendaring. Make it work out of the box without the fuss, and you got an Exchange-killer.

This is patently untrue. The Linux kernel is in constant competition with a myriad of other open systems out there, such as FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and SCO OpenServer. What is going on just happens to be on a much wider field than piddly desktop environments.

For example, there have been endless flamewars over FreeBSD's superior VM or Linux's POSIX compliance. In the end, you just have to realize that there are operating systems that are specialized in certain areas. Use the best tool for the job. If you happen to run a high-traffic Internet portal, then FreeBSD is certainly your ideal system. If you are the artistic type and enjoy dabbling in the GIMP or running your own mail server for your home network, then Linux is definitely the right tool for the job.

None of this specialization would have been possible if these other systems hadn't existed. Competition is the mother of invention, contrary to the popular proverb, and I don't doubt for a minute that Linus et al. would be resting on their laurels contemplating the wonders of FAT32 if it hadn't been for the fierce competition.

That's not entirely true. Caldera did purchase the assets of Digital Research from Novell, and begain a lawsuit against Microsoft, and settled for ~$250M. They must have needed the money badly because they settled, even though their case seemed very strong and an eventual win almost guaranteed. During this time Lineo (nee Caldera) did sell embedded solutions based on the DR-DOS code base. They also purchased the Arachne web browser for DOS, ported it to their Linux offering and sold it as DR-WebSpider. At the time they sold both DR-DOS and Linux based embedded packages, targeting the Kiosk market. They also made the source to DR-DOS (Caldera OpenDOS) available for the first release or two but closed it back up due to lack of interest, the difficulty of getting the build environment setup and business reasons.

DR-DOS lives on as the bootstrap for Novell Netware and I'm sure that there were a few other clients for embedded DOS (IIRC Kavouras used it, I can't remember others). DR-DOS, AFAIK, is still available for download and personal use, and Caldera has packaged it for use with DOSEmu. So while they did use DR-DOS for the lawsuit money (A perfectly valid and appropriate lawsuit if there ever was one) they also based the beginnings of their embedded offerings on it. Lineo is one of the better embedded companies right now, gunning for Wind River's marketshare, they are not going away.

Further DR-DOS history links

• http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~kkoster/micro soft/caldera.html
• http://www2.gol.com/users/joewein/dri.html

Real Bourne Shell will be released as source code sooner or later by Caldera. Here is the press release:

http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?l tsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD

http://ir.caldera.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID= 57417

And here are some quotes:

"The Regular Expression library and tools will be made publicly available on SourceForge this week at http://unixtools.sourceforge.net. In coming months, Caldera will Open Source other UNIX tools and utilities, including pkgmk, pkgadd, pkgrm, pkginfo, pkgproto and more, as well as the Bourne shell, lex, yacc, sed, m4 and make. The licenses under which these technologies will be Open Sourced will be decided based on community and business needs."

So, you must keep you eyes on this:

http://unixtools.sourceforge.net/

Meanwhile you can do portable shell-scripting with help from these WWW-pages:

http://www.raycosoft.com/rayco/support/porting.htm l

http://www.raycosoft.com/rayco/support/SANS_2001_f iles/v3_document.htm

http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/

http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobo ok_208.html

Ash is really good Bourne Shell clone and POSIX-shell implementation. I really like to use it for my shell-scripting, because it prevents me from using bashisms. In my Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 Potato /bin/sh is actually a symlink to ash that I compiled from sources I took from unstable Debian and it works.

But if /bin/sh is symlink to bash and you have some bashisms in you script that starts "#!/bin/sh", it seems, that even in that case bash won't complain about those bashisms.

But you must check out, which version of ash you are running. Debian has always used the latest version of ash. I think it is downloaded from this place:

ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-current/src /bin/sh/

Red Hat Linux had ash version 0.2 and it really sucks. Then I made bugreports and latest versions of Red Hat have fresher version of ash.

But it seems, that Slackware still has that ash version 0.2:

ncftp ...ware-8.0/source/ap/ash > pwd
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/mirrors/slackware/slac kware-8.0/source/ap/ash/
ncftp ...ware-8.0/source/ap/ash > ls
ash-linux-0.2.diff.gz _ash.tar.gz
ash-linux-0.2.tar.gz SlackBuild
ncftp ...ware-8.0/source/ap/ash >

BTW I really don't understand, why somebody would want to create installer scripts, when this kind of tool exists: http://www.easysw.com/epm/

EPM Is:

A free UNIX software/file packaging program that generates distribution archives from a list of files. EPM Can:

Generate portable script-based distribution packages complete with installation and removal scripts. Generate vendor distributions in AIX, BSD, Compaq Tru64, Debian, HP-UX, IRIX, Red Hat, and Solaris formats. Provide a complete, cross-platform software distribution solution for your applications.

Not to mention SCO^H^H^HCaldera OpenServer^H^H^H^H^H^HUnix that now ships with a 'Linux Kernel Personality' that allegedly runs Linux binaries faster than Linux. See this release about Oracle 9i.

Does that have any releation to "Genuine People Personalities" from the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation?

the point is, it's *his* waste of time.

Regardless of the licensing terms, this guy seriously doesn't expect to do anything truly useful with this OS.

Remember that Torvalds initially didn't use the GPL for the kernel.

Also note that Caldera has a 'distribution' that doesn't even use the kernel but rather reimplements a 'personality' -- I mean, even Unisys likes it !(I'm being sarcastic)

Understand, though, I am not criticising his intent -- he has an itch; he wants to scratch. At least he's pursuing his own muse.

OpenLinux WS has been out for a long time (many months). Most people wouldn't have realized that because Slashdot never posted a story to recognize that fact. This is why the packages seem a bit dated by now. Next time, before you flame a distro, check the Updates Directory which will show you a version of OpenSSH at 2.9.

Also, if you want the latest and greatest KDE, have no fear. Plenty of core KDE developers are employed by Caldera, so right from the official KDE FTP sight, you can spend the day downloading 2.2.1. I installed it on my workstation (yes, I use OpenLinux Workstation at work) and it works fine. 2.4.2 was the latest kernel available at the time of release, and since there have been no gaping security holes and that kernel has proven fairly stable, there's no reason to mess with a good thing.

Finally, I don't have too much to say with the licensing thing. Of course it was a business decision. As you might expect, with Caldera's stock hovering around 30 cents they're doing all they can to generate revenue. I wish them the best in these tough times.

Do we really want one Linux company?

Look at Caldera's third quarter results on Businesswire here. They're blaming it on the aquistion of
Tarantella. Also here is the official press release on the third quarter results.

Honestly, why in the world would I purchase Caldera Linux with their ridiculous per seat license when I can purchase one copy of RedHat Linux (at a lower price) and install it on as many machines as I like.
OK, according to the press release
, this distribution includes Borland JBuilder 4 from Borland. Since JBuilder is proprietary software with a seat license, Caldera is obligated to charge for each install. Its not a matter of charging for GPL software, but a matter of honoring Borland's license for their closed source software.
If you want to do Java Development (which is what Caldera is targeting with the distro) this is probably a good deal, since JBuilder costs $49.99, and the cost of the distro is $59 with support. I think that compares favorably with Red Hat's vanilla 7.1 version that checks in at $39.95.

3) What about the GPL? Well, what about it? Nothing Caldera is doing violates the GPL (at least, I can't prove it).

Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program.

(more from the GPL)

You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.

It seems to me this is clearly not allowed under the GPL. However, the above quote includes the word 'herein' - meaning in the GPL. The GPL specifically states:

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License;

A strange situation occurs (based on the information I have now): Caldera disallows use of their softare on more than one system, but it does not disallow redistribution. Much like 'shareware' licenses, which allow free distribution of the software, but use is limited.

Some people have argue that once you've obtained the software it's yours to do with as you please, but to redistribute the software (modified or not), you have to have permission from the copyright owner.

I don't think Caldera's model can survive. It can only work if none of the copyright holders decide to sue Caldera, and they actually have a much better distribution (to compensate for the loss in goodwill).

If this holds up, however, there is no longer any added value to the GPL versus some of the less restrictive licenses (BSD/MIT/X11 etc).

Conspicuously missing in this round-up are Caldera's eDesktop and eServer (i.e. OpenLinux) products, which are excellent Linux distributions. Caldera has been a fairly large contributor to the Linux world (NetWare support, the original version of RPM way back in the day, the GPLed graphical installer Lizard, their GPLed administration tool, COAS [compare to S.u.S.E.'s YaST, which is still proprietary...])

They also have a lot of big-name corporate deals involving Linux, a commercial version of embedded Linux (Lineo), and the code and customer list for SCO now. They were the first to ship with KDE as a graphical desktop (I believe with KDE Beta-3, before even KDE 1.0) and one of the first to ship with a full desktop of any kind (with Looking Glass, way back when). I think Caldera has always put out great distributions.

I use eDesktop 2.4 right now. I chose it after comparing it to a number of others. I have basically upgraded my distribution (not a fun task) after each generation of libraries -- first when the switch from a.out to elf was made (libc4 to libc5) and then when the switch from the linux-hacked GNU libc to the standard GNU libc was made (libc5 to libc6). My first distribution (a.out) was Slackware, but for both upgrades since then I've tried out a number of distributions, and both times I've ended up choosing Caldera's distributions over the likes of Red Hat and Debian. Why? The LISA tool (which you can choose instead of Lizard if you want) gives me Slackware-like flexibility during install, and once in, the compiler and library configurations always seem to compile more free source code "out of the box" without frustration, which is a big deal to me.

please redhat is built useing the nortel thing and they have mereged with CTP alot of work and its closed buggy and they dont own the core

caldera wrote volution you can run it on your own and it WORKS

http://www.caldera.com/products/volution/

try it out

regards

john jones

This thesis.

This keynote at Summer Comdex '99

This 'Presidents letter' at Caldera...

Let's not just say 'heresy'...let's THINK for once!

This thesis.

This keynote at Summer Comdex '99

This 'Presidents letter' at Caldera...

Let's not just say 'heresy'...let's THINK for once!

Um, that was Kondara, and they actually had some innovations of their own (complete system internationalization and language switching without reboot, and not just KDE) but not enough to justify their existence.

But for all the Caldera haters: Volution and OpenSLP have the potential to change corporate perception of Linux, and the way infrastructure is set up.

I find it curious and rather laughable that a number of Slashdot readers claim not to have heard of Caldera, or make comments to the effect that Caldera ought to further promote their distro and gain increased visibility. First, Caldera is oriented entirely towards the business user and server markets, thus its low "desktop user" name recognition.

Second, Caldera is that company that bought SCO-UNIX (remember them?) It has been committed to integrating features found in the commercial UnixWare product into mainstream Linux, and has been steadily developing Volution, a complete Linux network management infrastructure.

Caldera's target audience is the corporate space, which is not necessarily ideologically enamoured of Open Source, preferring to keep intellectual property rights and profit from them. Without a licensing scheme that gives these companies the confidence to venture into mainstream Linux acceptance, they never may. Caldera should be observed with keen interest, not scorn, for having the courage to say what many have been thinking for a while, and see what solutions thy come up with.

There is one, Caldera, a corporation merging with SCO has provided OpenLinux for years, as for SCo they are known for their OpenServer and UnixWare products.

No, Linus is not upset about it. He has a trademark on Linux, not OpenLinux or RedHat Linux or even Yellow Dog Linux, and has treated it as such.

Some Additional Linux Distribution Suggestions

• Caldera Systems
• Turbo Linux
• SuSE
• Mandrake

• Sun/Open Office
• Applix/Applixware Office
• Oracle
• HP
• Compaq
• Dell
• GNU

• Osborne/McGraw-Hill
• O'Reilly
• Sybex

Let's see. Depending on who you want to sell on the issue, we certainly have the big boys. IBM , HP and quite likely Compaq (the TrueUnix/VMS folks, not the crappy box assemblers) can quite likely deliver expensive support and professional Linux services. Of course it's up to you to determine the quality. But you also have to do that when EDS is shipping 10 of their clones with bad haircuts to you.

Then there are specialized companies whose most prominent representation is probably Linuxcare.

Finally and - in my experience most importantly there are the distributers who base their business model basically on services. I had outstanding experiences with SuSE (American site) which guided me through struggles getting X up on my notebook. They made a very idealistic, determined and goal oriented impression and delivered far better support then what I've seen with companies that charge $1/4 million a year (and that was the free issue installation support). They run a professional services department and they have various support plans including 24/7 - and dedicated resource plans. Pricing looks quite reasonable.

I can't vouch for Red Hat, Mandrake , or Caldera, but at least Red Hat has a good reputation.

So, here we go. There's a lot around to chose from and compare. If the gentlemen in the suits insist on an IBMHPSUNDEC rubber stamp, here you go and you probably pay for it through your nose. Not that the distributers quite give away theire services, but from what I've seen there seems to be excellent value there.

I would have to disagree with the comment about source code. As we know from /., open source has a lot of supporters. The organization I work for uses Netscape and IE, but Netscape Messenger is the official mail client. One thing that's good right now, we get very few instances of these Outlook viruses.

But, since we're talking about browsers, the Caldera OpenLinux I have at home included Netscape. People use Netscape, and using Mozilla is a way to try to get more to use it.

Spooon!

<<Of course there's also the native Atari GUI, GEM. I've a feeling you can get the source for DR's GEMDOS now, but I may be wrong. >>

GEM was originally a PC product, ported to a cut-down version of CM/P-68K (GEMDOS) on the ST. The PC version is now owned by Lineo, the thin-clients division of Caldera, and it has made PC GEM GPLed free software. Efforts are afoot to update it and bring it up to parity with commercial GEM developments such as Magic which run on modern ST-compatibles like the Milan.

You can check out progress on the prject, download source and binaries and join the discussion mailing list on the FreeGEM homepage.

It can't be revenues ($3 million in '99) or profits ($9.4 million loss in '99).

Caldera Systems' products would appear to be proprietary Linux ports of Noorda's, I mean, Novell's successful and fast-growing Netware line plus Red Hat-based OpenLinux distro. The Lizard installer (co-developed with TrollTech) seems to have been finally open-sourced last September under TrollTech's QPL but the only reference to COAS licensing seemed to imply that the source will only be released after the administration tools are developed , whatever that means.

Offering only approximately 5% of the stock to the public is a time-tested method of increasing demand by artificially restricting supply. Ray Noorda (holding 73% after IPO) will be laughing all the way to the bank even if the IPO tanks. Even Sun, SCO, Citrix etc. got their pre-IPO shares at $6 a few months ago while TrollTech got theirs via equity swap. However the common man only "wins" if the company is really going to be worth over $1 billion in the not too distant future. Also be warned that daytraders and marketmakers (both well-known market manipulators) may quickly boost the price quite high after opening but they're also able to dump their "holdings" in a split second when the price starts heading south.

Are people even aware that this Caldera Systems, Inc. isn't the same as Caldera, Inc.? Since they took over www.caldera.com from their mother company any references to the latter have been hard to find. At least they're still proudly carrying a link to the Caldera vs. Microsoft (SETTLED!) page, even though the dough went to the old Caldera, Inc. instead. I hope that the DOJ's case will finally produce Microsoft a guilty verdict instead because it would be too painful to see Gates (unrelated tip: try searching Chairman Gates' site for "Linux") proclaiming again how Microsoft has never, ever done anything remotely naughty, how the operating system and Office suite markets are, as always, extremely competitive and how they only settled to be able to better continue innovating for their customers...

Anyways, it will be interesting to see what impact the nouveau rich Caldera Systems, Inc. will have on Red Hat's market valuation and strategies; both of these primarily server and service-oriented companies are going to be accountable for their shareholders' financial well-being. With Caldera Systems, Inc. IPO already priced above Corel's market valuation perhaps Red Hat should reconsider strengthening their position by buying out Corel (currently valued at only 10% of RHAT market cap), selling Corel's investments in other companies for cash and then creating a number of subsidiaries with their own lucrative IPO's of the Corel product lines as e.g. the WordPerfect Office Corp., the Corel Draw and Publishing Corp., the Red Corel Linux OS for desktop etc. Say what you will but competition between these Linux-based companies is going to get started.

There are some ultra orthodox religious conservatives in Utah, and considering that the state legislature is about 70% Republican, with so much control that the Democrats can't even stop a bill even if it is vetoed by the Governor. This tends to make legislative activity more like political platform actions, and some people have even suggested that most state legislative action actually occurs during the state Republican party convention, or at least during the party legislative caucus meetings.

Even with all of that kept in mind, it is still surprising how much erotic literature can be found in paper form, even at public libraries in a very conservative state like Utah. And don't think that the people in Utah are technically illiterate. Senator Bob Bennett chairs the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem (The Y2K Comittee), in fact he helped push the formation of the comittee in the Senate. Utah is also home to tech companies like Novell, Caldera, Thiokol(the makers of the space shuttle booster rockets), Iomega, and many others. To say that Utah is being backward in their decisions is not really taking notice of what happened. The state legislature took the considered opinions of many tech professionals, together with the screaming opinions of a strong conservative religious constituancy and came up with the legislation that could be considered "the will of the people" in a representative democracy.

This isn't to say that this is a one-way street either. If it turns out that net filtering will keep out politically sensitive sites (which it does), it will eventually prove to be a faulty technology.

Although it smacks of corporate greediness, and it is apparent that Linux developers who work for free can't join the members list, why can't the corporate Linux companies, such as Red Hat, Caldera or VA Linux systems join, and make their copies of the specifications available to developers. There may be copyright issues, but if the USB developers work "for" one of these companies, then surely there is no problem. The end-result would still be GPLed, and available to all, it's just a nominal shift in who you are working for.

Linux has a number of high-profile companies now, and it's in their interests to ensure the best hardware compatibility for their distributions. $2500 is a small price to pay for that from their point of view, surely.

-anil-

I've been reading The Microsoft File : The Secret Case Against Bill Gates (don't buy it here!). There's some interesting tidbits about MSDOS vs DRDOS, MS vs Novell, and Bill Gates vs Ray Noorda in there (Also lots of boring bits; I give the book two stars out of five - I didn't hurl it from me, but I have to force myself to read it). Noorda was the CEO of Novell in the early 90s. He retired from Novell and founded Caldera. This article summarizes the history of Noorda and Caldera. The current CEO of Caldera is also from Novell. I'd guess that Noorda brought him over, and that he has a fair amount of personal loyalty to Noorda, his values, and his goals.

Noorda has it in for MS, and I would say deservedly so. MS proposed a merger with Novell and basically pillaged all kinds of inside business and technical information before saying "Nevermind." Novell bought DRDOS, only to have MS...well, you can read that history yourself. A couple of passages in the book indicate that Noorda felt that Bill Gates had lied to him personally.

Noorda doesn't think that MS is good for the software industry. A benign dictator can be acceptable, but an blood-crazed psychopathic tyrant is a Bad Thing (tm). De facto industry standards are fine as long as they don't come from the end of a gun.

I think that your opinion (about business plans)is tactically sound but strategically wrong. If Microsoft is taken apart - or at least taken down a few notches - there will be more opportunities for everyone in the software industry. If EVERYONE said "Our plan is to take something away from Microsoft," MS would find itself assaulted from all sides and unable to compete effectively without choosing some battles and losing some battles. Noorda is doing his part, and if everyone else would do the same, the software industry would be a different place. Better or worse, I honestly can't say, but definitely different.

• LinuxOne's GPL violation status:
• • They acknowledge the requirement to provide a written offer in the README on the CDROM
  • They acknowledge the problem when contacted by phone
  • They have failed to follow through on providing the source code on their FTP site
• Caldera has distributed OpenLinux Demo CDs without source code or a written offer of source code.
• • The CDROM README file does no discuss the availablity of the source code at all
  • Caldera refuses to respond to email on the subject
  • Caldera refuses to address the problem when contacted by phone stating a policy of requiring software authors to contact the Caldera contact assigned to them at the time Caldera choose to redistribute their software (however, Caldera has not assigned contacts to GPL authors, only to companies authoring commerical licensed software). They have refused to acknowledge that there is any problem.
• Linux Systems Labs in their product titles implies that entire CDs are covered by the GPL when in actuality the CD conatins several packages that are not covered by the GPL (this act is described as a GPL violation by the Free Software Foundation)
• Linux Central when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
• Cheap Bytes when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
• IBM has been in violation of the LGPL for over 400 days since the time they have distributed unsupported ADSM for Linux. To date, they still have not made the object files for ADSM available for accomplishing relinking against modified versions of the LGPL material. There is every reason to believe that IBM will remain in violation of the LGPL throughout the entire 1999 year.

That bit of damage has already been done. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure the Findings of Fact indicating that Microsoft is a monopoly that abuses their monopoy power is now a matter of public record that can be used in other relevant suits. I'm sure that Caldera will be incorporating it into evidence for their suit.

----

mochaone wrote:

So let me get this straight. I'm supposed to gather evidence to support my suppositions, yet you are allowed to postulate as to what Judge Jackson is going to do?

No, you were postulating about what the appeals court would do, and I asked for some evidence for your postulations. I too was postulating, and in spite of your sarcastic tone, I will take your statements as a request for evidence on my part.

You seem to be questioning two points of mine: I expect the findings of fact will probably declare Microsoft to be a monopoly, and not suggest anything as to remidies, which is really two points: I expect the findings will declare monopoly, and I expect they won't suggest remedies at this point. The other point is A slap on the wrist would hasten the death of the proprietary software industry, because Microsoft would continue to kill it.

First, I expect the findings of fact to declare Microsoft a monopoly because that is far from controvertial. The rule of thumb is a company is a monopoly if it has more than a 70% market share, Microsoft has a 90% market share. The controversy is over whether or not Microsoft used its Monopoly powers illegally, and I did not speculate on what Jackson would find there.

I expect the findings of fact to suggest no remedies because there is no other reason for Judge Jackson to split the findings of fact from the Judgement. Microsoft asserted that they will appeal any negative judgement very early in the trial. The purpose of separating the judgement from the findings of fact is to shield the facts of the case (which are harder to appeal) from being dragged through the mud during the appeal of the judgement. Suggesting remedies during the findings of fact would defeat the purpose.

Lastly, as for Microsoft killing the proprietary software industry, here is some good material to support my opinion:
Caldera v Microsoft Complaint
Reiser v Microsoft on allegedly illegal product tying
A Rutgers University analysis of Microsoft's use of predatory pricing to destroy competitors
A Reuters Article describing Microsoft's pressure on Acer to not sell competitors applications

In all, Microsoft is clearly trying to encompass as much of the industry as they can get away with, and kill any competitors that stand in their way. If they're the only provider of proprietary software, it's no longer an industry, hence they would have killed the industry. Personally, I don't think it's a great loss, since Microsoft is a big fish, eating all the little fishes (other proprietary vendors), while the rest of us are learning to farm kelp (Free software).

Hmm...I guess since you're saying it, "evidence" isn't needed to prove your point?
No, I was saying evidence was needed to prove your point. As you can see above, there's lots of evidence to support my point.

PS: I was completely baffled by your talk of movies and heads. What were you trying to say there?

----

Well, how does TurboLinux differ from the situation above? Well...

• TurboLinux figured out from the *beginning* that it was to their advantage to release their module under GPL. Caldera's distribution went through several revisions before they decided to make the source code available.
• The size modification to the kernel is smaller! NKFS was 2940 lines of code, IP_CS is 2781 lines of code
• IP_CS is better broken up into approx 60 functions whereas NKFS is only broken into approx 50 functions.
• The header files for NKFS has only two lines of comment explaining the purpose of the data structures. The IP_CS header file has comments next to every variable and function defined.
• The NDS browser uses RSA code which is under patent and US export control which means that Caldera probably will never release the entire source code (if any) of the program which uses the NKFS module. TurboLinux has indicated that as newer versions of the cluster server daemon comes out that they will release the source code to the older versions.
• NKFS has never been a part of the offical kernel source distribution and Caldera has never indicated that they will try to submit it for being included. IP_CS is also presently not part of the offical kernel source distribution but TurboLinux appears to be interested in submitting it for being included in future major versions of the kernel.
• The November 1999 Linux Journal lists Caldera's website as having had approx 10,000 visits whereas TurboLinux was listed as having less than 2,000. It seems clear that Caldera has five times the influce in pushing a prioritary fork.

So why are we getting so upset over the fact that George Weiss of Gartner Group Inc. has "fork fears"?! Isn't this the same G. Weiss that in January had fears about the "chaotic nature of the [Linux] market." He goes on to state "... best practices would entail putting in place practices to discourage, if not ban, code hacking when using Linux." Does this guy really understand Linux? The fact is that being able to code hack linux is one of it's biggest advantages. Another advantage is the growing number of non-standard modules. For example: you get better performce with INN v2 if you have rawfs, your not going to get far on the network with a Madge token ring card unless you have loaded the non-standard Madge kernel module driver and if you want to really fork from standard kernel method just put a distribution together based around the results of the GGI Project or RTLinux. Non-standard kernel patches and modules have been around for a long time and IP_CS is no different. History has shown that the main Linux kernel can survive this "problem." So, hand a spoon to Mr Weiss' "fork fears" and enjoy what TurboLinux is providing under GPL.

Yes, it is. When I and a partner a time ago worked on a specification of how we would manage to implement a thin client philosofy on a company, we sticked to the concept of intranet aplications, maybe with a framework for that done in Java Servlets. I know there are some solutions for working with Java on thin clients, but even if I like Java, it's not thin enought to run on a thin client. But some web browsers are ( ex: DrWebSpyder from Caldera, wich run on a i386 and comes in a single floppy ), and can access server side logic with Servlets. Some classes can give you graphics on demand, PDF on demand and so on, and I also imagine these clients will run aplications that would consist in endless forms if done in other languages, so, HTML has all you need. I hope I have been of some help. You could check Caldera Website and The JavaSoft Site for some more info.

Apparently you have no idea what events have taken place in the last couple years regarding Microsoft and Java. Here's a quick summary: Sun Microsystems, developer of Java, intended for it to be a cross platform compatible programming language (i.e. compile once, run anywhere), and it licensed it that way. Java has been slow to develop due to compatibility issues and has of yet not been too successful. Microsoft took it upon themselves to fine tune Java to run on windows very well, provided you developed your app on Visual J++ and ran it on Windows. According to Sun, programs that were developed on Visual J++ would not run on other platforms, thus violating the license agreement. Sun sued M$ and as far as I can tell are winning. M$ is backing off (forcefully, I assume), and started pulling Visual J++ off the shelves. Here's the REAL KICKER: Shortly after all this took place what did M$ do? They released a java clone language that they called, I believe, cool. If I'm wrong somebody please correct that.

Now if this isn't classic M$, I don't know what is. As far as the MSN Messenger, here's what would happen if a standard we're formed (IMHO): M$ would gain market share because they are M$, ignorant people would use it for that reason. Once M$ had a significant share of the market, they would make changes to their software, thus not allowing anybody else to use it. If you need more evidence of how corrupt M$ ways are go to Caldera's web site. There's a whole story about MSDOS, DRDOS, and windows.... you'll love it.

While I would agree that the DOS/NEWDEAL OFFICE combination is an excellent low-power solution for running a "modern" OS on old hardware, this solution just doesn't quite give you the MP3 playback capability that we're looking for here. I ran Caldera DR-DOS and NewDeal on my P100 laptop for quite a while and it worked like magic (until I finally installed linux). If you haven't, you should really check out www.newdealinc.com for information on a really awesome alternative desktop operating environment for 8088-80386 PCs (and for people not wanting to run Linux.)