Slashdot Mirror

Stick?!? In USA atleat they use SCO Unix. That's according to this.

Well, I know one way to get great results. All you have to do it be Litigious bastards and you're set.

It's forward-looking statements are amusing.

Did you mean: the release on the litigious bastards' site?

Darn! I was hoping the the URL pointed to the litigious bastards' own web site. That way when the /. effect hit, they could accuse us Linux freaks of another DOS attack.

Link to the realease on the SCO's site

The SCO Group, Inc. today reported revenue of $10,137,000 for the quarter ended April 30, 2004. While current quarter revenue is down from revenue of $21,369,000 from the comparable period of the prior year, this is primarily the result of a lack of SCOsource licensing revenue. SCOsource revenue was $8,250,000 in the second quarter of fiscal year 2003. Revenue for the first two quarters of fiscal year 2004 was $21,529,000 compared to revenue for the first two quarters of fiscal year 2003 of $34,909,000.

Conference Call

As previously announced, we will host a conference call at 11:00 a.m. EDT today, June 10, 2004, to discuss our second quarter 2004 results. To participate in the teleconference, please call (800) 795-1259 or (785) 832-0326, confirmation code 431766, approximately five minutes prior to the time stated above.

Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.

Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?

Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.

Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?

Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.

Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?

Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.

Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?

Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.

Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?

In other news, SCO is a bunch of Litigious Bastards.

IE's got holes, it's non-standards-compliant... but it's the standard out there folks. Sure, someday people my open their eyes and use a compliant browser someday, but I sit here on my lunch break, and I'm on IE.

• The SCO® Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX) will host its second quarter 2004 financial results conference call on Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 9:00 a.m. (MDT), or 11:00 a.m. (EST).

  If you would like to participate in the live call you may dial 800-795-1259 or 785-832-0326; confirmation code: 431766.

About google bombing, does someone know if it works inside a style="display:none"'ed element? I'd like to add some links to the litigious bastards and Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's fake research, but I wouldn't like to have visible links and generate hits for them.

That's just irresponsible. By putting that link there (the one that says Litigious Bastards), you're contributing to the problem.

Again, responsible people do not put "Litigious Bastards" links in their slashdot posts.

Think about it? How would you like a google search for Litigious Bastards to point to your company, leading everyone to think that you and your co-workers are nothing but a bunch of Litigious Bastards?

That's just irresponsible. By putting that link there (the one that says Litigious Bastards), you're contributing to the problem.

Again, responsible people do not put "Litigious Bastards" links in their slashdot posts.

Think about it? How would you like a google search for Litigious Bastards to point to your company, leading everyone to think that you and your co-workers are nothing but a bunch of Litigious Bastards?

That's just irresponsible. By putting that link there (the one that says Litigious Bastards), you're contributing to the problem.

Again, responsible people do not put "Litigious Bastards" links in their slashdot posts.

Think about it? How would you like a google search for Litigious Bastards to point to your company, leading everyone to think that you and your co-workers are nothing but a bunch of Litigious Bastards?

That's just irresponsible. By putting that link there (the one that says Litigious Bastards), you're contributing to the problem.

Again, responsible people do not put "Litigious Bastards" links in their slashdot posts.

Think about it? How would you like a google search for Litigious Bastards to point to your company, leading everyone to think that you and your co-workers are nothing but a bunch of Litigious Bastards?

We, for one, saw how the SCO joke (litigious b'turds) managed to GoogleBomb SCO in first place without a problem.

You forgot the link: Litigious Bastards

Bear in mind that this is not the same company. The company formerly known as The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. is now known as Tarantella Inc. The company now known as Litigious Bastards oops I mean The SCO Group, Inc. is what used to be not Litigious Bastards I mean Caldera Systems Inc.

For better evil, use SCO instead (Limited time offer: Just $699!).

Fercryinoutloud, everyone knows the propeller scrambles the transmissions so you can't accidentally zap bystanders with backscatter mind-control radiation.

On the other hand, randomized backscatter mind control radiation might be the easiest way to explain the behavior of certain companies.

People and corporations change all the time. Remember the old evil The SCO Group? No more. They're now embracing linux again. I've got the evidence right here.

"As a corporate sponsor of Linux International, SCO is a strong proponent of the Open Source movement, citing it as a driving force for innovation. Over the years, SCO has contributed source code to the movement, and currently offers a free Open License Software Supplement CD that includes many Open Source technologies."

See? :-)

I expect AdTI to change soon also. Mr.Brown is going to apologize to Torvalds, Tanenbaum and the whole community, don't you think?

Is there anything else anyone thinks I should burn with it? it's in my garage.

IBM could switch over to BSD without scarcely missing a beat.

IIRC, SCO said that FreeBSD was also vulnerable to their lawsuit, but that's another story. Litigious Bastards...

It's worked so far for other litigious bastards, why not them?

Reminds me of SCO's spin on a VARBusiness article back in October. Here's SCO's version. Now check out the original article. SCO did indeed rate in the top four. Out of five.

.... don't actually create a competitive product, fire all your coders and replace them with lawyers, and sue everyone in existence in hopes that somebody will give you money to leave them alone?

Of course, that strategy has yet to be proven, and it seems to have a few holes in it....

are we all going to change our stance because its Apple?

Well, yeah. It's called reputation and it doesn't appear out of thin air; a company needs a good PR team and competitive products to earn it.

Don't worry though, the system is self-fixing - if they annoy their customers beyond a certain point or start behaving like really bad kids, you'll get more Apple-bashing than you can handle. After all, and IIRC that was what happened in the pre-Jobs-comeback era, when the Apple is dying trolls ran rampant.

"....overly litigious asshole?" I thought it was Litigous Bastards

"Caldera International, Inc. (Nasdaq: CALD), the global leader in ''Unifying UNIX with Linux for Business''" -- SCO Press Release

I was under the impression that you could only patent the implementation of an idea. If MS were to become litigious bastards would they not have to prove the offending code and make their own visible as well?

And mod me offtopic, but what I've been wondering is how would anyone know if there is a MS employee working on an OS project, and using MS code in it for the express purpose of discrediting OS at a later time?

Of course, if you don't trust that website, how about ZDNet or even compare the numbers yourself. There's Veritest's Apple numbers, versus the offical published numbers from SPEC. There's also this site which goes into detail about the benchmark. They used -ffast-math on PPC, but not on x86, for instance. They explicitly turned off hyperthreading, which obviously hurt the Dell machine during the MP tests.

Then again, as the old saying goes, there's three types of lies. Lies, damn lies and benchmarks.

PizzaTool used a GUI to let you select your toppings, crust, etc., and even provided a cute little graphical rendition of your pizza which you could "spin" to get all the various pixels to blend together and simulate the melted cheese, etc. I think it was written using their "NeWS" system. It ordered by FAX and went to Tony & Alba's Pizza, which has been a consistent favorite in the SF Bay Area for at least 15 years or so. It even had a cool warning that popped up when you hit the "order" button that said (roughly) "WARNING! This is about to send a *real* FAX to a *real* pizza parlor, who will deliver a *real* pizza and ask you for *real* money! Are you sure you want to continue?"

Since my friends and I were in school in Buffalo, NY at the time, we were pretty sure they wouldn't deliver to us, but it definitely gave us an early glimpse into the importance of pizza in the workplace in early Silicon Valley culture, not to mention introducing me to the existence of Tony & Alba's! (When I moved here a couple years later, I made a pilgrimage and they've been a favorite ever since.) This only worked in Mountain View, CA, at the time, but that's where Sun was concentrated then. (Still is.) Tony & Alba's has 7 shops around the Bay Area, now, and their own website - http://www.tonyalba.com/

PizzaNet used a web-to-FAX system that would submit the order using the existing Pizza Hut FAX ordering system, and your pie would arrive in about 1/2 hour. I used it once around May/June of 1994 and it worked wonderfully. This one only worked around Santa Cruz, CA, but again, that's where SCO was concentrated, then. It was written by my friend, Steph, who had been the IS Director at SCO for years at that point, and knew that Engineers were mainly fueled by pizza and caffeine (still are!) so he made sure pizza was easily available at the touch of a few keys. (There were free soda fountains in all SCO buildings.) This SCO "easy pizza" policy, like the Corporate Hot Tub, also went away as the "Age of the Suits" began to take over in the mid-late 1990's.

The neat thing about both systems, aside from providing a really geeky way to get pizza (which obviously still amuses us to this day, given this article's appearance on /. ), was that they both interfaced with the existing FAX-based systems the pizza parlors had in place, and didn't bother any of the pizza makers/delivery folks with any new interfaces or computer details, allowing them to focus on what they did best, and allowing us to get pizza easily. (Remember that both of these were many years before most people/businesses had even *heard* of the Internet, and in the case of PizzaTool, before the WWW even existed! When did *you* first hear of them?)

There are lots of good ideas floating around. Especially in computers and software. However, there are far fewer that are actually original or new ideas. Dig into the history a bit. It's fun, and you'll likely be surprised. You may also save yourself a whole lot of coding-time. :-)

-Pat

Please state your sources every time you claim a fact!!!!

According to the RBoC stock coversion, SCO has a business presence in 82 countries with a network of 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. While the 11,000 resellers are solution providers, and their developers when dubbed developer network is listed as 8,000 in number, I haven't seen any actual "employees" numbers anywhere.

You use nothing more but a vague "good" to describe a well-performing economy. That's just pathetic.

Consumer debt load is at record high, including mortgage debt. According to the same source (USATODAY), "household debt levels rose nearly 11% in 2003" alone!!! This does not tell good things about household balance sheets. In fact, consumer debt levels reveal what the balance sheets wouldn't. In this case, they tell you how sh*t-fscked the Americans got, living today on money they will earn tomorrow for years now and it can't get better.

And when was the last time you checked the 2003 record-high $380 billion dollar deficit.

I am not opposing the fact that the economy doesn't suck. But you have not shown it and made close to zero effot (only concrete unemployment numbers)!! You have to know your facts and know what makes a good economy first.

I will conclude my point by reiterating the fundamentals. I said it once, I'll say it fscking again: State your sources!!!

• IBM has breached 2.05 of the Software Agreement by, inter alia, actively promoting and allowing use of the Software Products and development methods related thereto in an open and hostile attempt to destroy the entire economic value of the Software Products and plaintiff's rights to protect the proprietary nature of the Software Products. By way of example and not limitation, IBM has used protected UNIX methods for others in accelerating development of the 2.4.x kernel and 2.5.x Linux kernel in, among others, the following areas:
• (a) scalability improvements,
• (b) performance measurement and improvements,
• (c) serviceability and error logging improvements,
• (d) NUMA scheduler and other scheduler improvements,
• (e) Linux PPC 32- and 64-bit support,
• (f) AIX Journaling File System,
• (g) enterprise volume management system to other Linux components,
• (h) clusters and cluster installation, including distributed lock manager and other lock management technologies,
• (i) threading,
• (j) general systems management functions, and
• (k) other areas.
• But for the use by IBM of these protected UNIX methods in Linux development, the Linux 2.4.x kernel and 2.5.x kernel capacity to perform high-end enterprise computing functions would be severely limited.

Well, you could buy a license from litigious bastards.

I agree with you. The British Coast Guard should dump their Windows systems and run some version of Unix, just like the British Army does.

I would like to warn Slashdot users that SCO will be responsible for the licensing of the technology described in this article.

If you are currently using this patented technology please contact SCO Licensing for more details

Yours Faithfully,

Darl McBride

Google's search results are not "paid for". In this sense it means that the results are fair and everyone has a good crack at the whip. Paid "Ad's" are not search results they are keyword search targetted, They are also clearly seperated from the real search results and are unobtrusive.

It seems to me that AXA are trying to sue Google because they aint happy with their search ranking. Could this be a new frontier in influencing search results by threatening legal proceedings?

I think that google should under no circumstances allow anybody to influence their search ranking results directly through paid advertising, suing or otherwise. In the end allowing this to happen would be its downfall.

Of course there are other ways of influencing googles search results (we all know about the litigious bastards episode!). But these tricks of the trade are available to everyone, Google's search algorithm will evolve and be tweaked all the time to filter out blatent abuse. So long as everybody has the same chances it will remain fair.

And thats how I see it.

Nick ...

Dear Slashdot users,

If you would like permission to legally view the content of search engines such as Google, contact SCO licensing where we can provide individual licenses for only $699 per search engine or a bulk license of $10^699 for all search engines.

If you do not comply I will publicly brand you a Linus long-hair and GNU hippy, and will ask Microsoft for money to sue you with.

Yours faithfully,

Darl McBride,

CEO SCO Inc.

He was also the CIO for Chicago-based Waste Management, Inc.

How appropriate...

I thought their purpose was to sue linux

But if you buy a linux licence like EV1 did, you get a subpoena by IBM, and end up in a lawsuit.

MORAL: Stay away from the Litigous Bastards

(Sorry. A discussion about spam wouldn't be complete without some actual spam, would it? :-))

No, really. Dig out that old 486 box with DOS 6.22, or OpenDOS 7 (remember, DR DOS people have nothing to do with the litigious bastards), or whatever version of DOS you have around, and let it run. Hell, it might even work in OS/2 or something.

Unless you're in the right, and want to prevent other bottom feeders from trying the same sort of tactics. In that case, you don't throw money at the problem, you throw lots and lots of lawyers.

So... if I fail to attend online church, do I go to virtual hell when I die?

Spare the hassle of dying, virtual hell is available to those who are still alive as well.

> mental midgits from Provo.

Lindon. Just because Provo is nearby doesn't mean that we're ok if you get the two confused.
I mean, c'mon... Lindon is like a 15 minute drive from Provo. ;)