Slashdot Mirror
SCO Releases Linux OS for Itanium 2
GreyPoopon writes "Computerworld has an article referring to SCO's announcement of Enterprise Linux for the Itanium 2. Base installation starts at $999 for up to four CPUs. My favorite quote: "With its new system, SCO is a little late to the Linux on Itanium 2 market." I would think being late would be the least of their worries right now. I personally consider this to be my daily dose of comedy. Newsfactor has a better article."
what's this Itanium I keep hearing about?
Shift happens. Fire it up.
their out of date skunkware for OpenServer. Does that mean no more user licenses?
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
RMS's favorite distribution is now available.
Isn't there some way to tell them, fuck you, stay away from our OS? Stupid double-edged sword of open source...
Does this mean they're going to have to sue themselves?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
To threaten the community as they've done and now to try to profit from that same community is just one more evidence that these guys JUST DON'T GET IT!
Just let them implode and fade away!
Fund the death of Linux!
If Baghdad Bob hanged himself the other day, he obviously made it to heaven, and God must have left the Reality Machine unattended.
Q: What's the difference between SCO and a carp ?
A: One is a worthless scum-sucking bottom dweller, the other is a fish...
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
Are the still around? - i have a sig, but it is not very good
Linux supporter #7574934
It's ironic that SCO is suing IBM over code in the Linux kernel.. but they're making profits off of Linux. Got to love the greed of big business.
Someone should hoover up that bastard child, strip out what little proprietary software they have, and re-release it as the AntiSco Linux distribution. $2.99 for a limited time only.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
or will they take out any IBM contributions?
This is totally offtopic, and I'm sure it will get modded that way, but I don't think there is anything more puzzling than the circus peanuts. They're the opposite of delicious.
And they're one of those things that, no matter how often you say to yourself "These things are disgusting" you'll ALWAYS try one the next time someone offers you one, thinking that they really can't be that bad if they still make them.
Sorry about that, had to be said.
SCO's suit, which requests "not less than $1 billion" for damages, has been a source of great controversy in the Linux community.
No controversy on Slashdot certainly.
Nosirree Bob.
A thousand dollars for a linux install, eh? These SCO people must know something I don't. Seriously, can anyone tell me what would justify paying that?
"The company's base edition of Linux Server 4.0 software is licensed to accommodate up to 4 Itanium 2 processors."
OK, so it's good for a to 4-way system before you have to pay more money. But later...
"It supports 4GB of RAM..."
If you're paying out for a 4-way Itanium 2, wouldn't you (typically) want to handle more than 4GB RAM? I imagine there are applications that benefit from a 64-bit CPU but don't use much RAM, but I thought the core market was people using large amounts of data?
Or does it support more RAM and this article's just not great?
SCO Group, inheritor of the intellectual property for the Unix operating system, has sued itself for more than $1 billion, alleging that SCO misappropriated their own Unix technology and built it into Linux.
The suit, filed Thursday afternoon in the 3rd District Court of Salt Lake County in Utah, alleges misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, breach of contract and tortious interference with SCO's business, the Lindon, Utah-based company said. SCO also sent a letter to itself on Thursday demanding that if it doesn't meet various demands, SCO will revoke it's own license to ship its version of Unix, in 100 days.
"We are alleging we have contaminated our UnitedLinux work with inappropriate knowledge from Unix," said Chris Sonfag, senior vice president of operating systems at SCO and head of the company's SCO source effort to make more money from its intellectual property.
Analysts saw the move as a desperate one for SCO, a company that hasn't been profitable in its current incarnation.
"It's a fairly end-of-life move for the stockholders and managers of that company," said Jonthan Unice, an Illuminato analyst. "I mean, hell, they've already gone ahead and filed suit against IBM - but, this is really over the top."
very subtle. nice. the use of "way cool" in all caps gave you up though. work on that and you will be a troll master.
More information on SCO, it's lawsuit, the many boycotts against it and why they aren't exactly the ideal company can be found here.
"I filter at +6, and have yet to miss out on an important comment." (#822545)
Microsoft is starting to fall apart, even if this is not entirely obvious.
Was this modded as funny? Microsoft continues to do well whether or not you like them.
nah, unfortunately not. SCO is like the smell of dirty rotten clothes. they're there, everyone knows it. they don't know where, but that damn stinky smell just won't go away! no matter how many times you wash!
What exactly are the advantanges of 64bit ona laptop?
This is the best news for the day. I have to tell my boss about this. We could sure use it as a new database server.
Right!
Newsfollow.com
I don't think there's any controversy at all on slashdot about SCO; there appears to be a strong consensus that they suck.
an extra 32 bits. Duh!
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
The advantage of having an Itanium2 in a laptop is simple: you then have portable cooker as well as portable computer...
-- The day Microsoft makes things that don't suck, it's the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
... Thats it
keep dreaming; microsoft is not falling apart, it's merely diversifying (into hardware).
It's been around a lot longer than you so it *knows* what's going on.
The one thing microsoft aka bill gates isn't, is dumb. he knows exactly what to do.
Not sure if it'd be worth the bother... SCO's "enhancements" (if you can call them that) generally suck anyway. I'd rather just see a parody distro of SCO than anything attempting to be usefull...
Besides, RedHat, Gentoo, and SuSE are way better (as well as being alot nicer) Although the whole RedHat/Pink Tie thing is a bit annoying...
Hopefully SCO will just die soon.
Rushfan
I mean, to buy those CPUs retail would cost about $2000, so this is a really good deal.
... what's that? this is JUST for the OS? Bugger off. That's insane.)
(Wait
See this is all part of the strategy... sue IBM for infringing on your IP, so everyone will buy your product so that they won't be liable.
But wait, release a GPL product with your IP embedded in it... doesn't that mean that your IP is now GPL?
Boy am I confused, so SCO is suing IBM for writing software that they are now selling for themselves and benifiting from.
Where can I buy tickets to the court case? I can't wait for this!
"The similarities of sysadmins and drug dealers: both measure stuff in K's, and both have users."
... let it go. If it returns to you you know it loves you too. On the other hand, if after you release it, it doesn't return, or indeed, if it returns and attacks... well... then, I hope IBM fscking rings your clock you bastards!
Forgive me if i'm wrong, but aren't all AGP and PCI devices mapped to the memory around 4GB? (below I think) If this is the case, wouldn't this have significant bearing on the limit opposed to just lameness on the part of SCO?
Just a thought,
Steve.
What's this? SCO still makes a product? I thought they got out of that business.
You just described RMS.
That hurt, dude. Harsh!
So WTF is the deal here?
I don't get it so please tell me how all of this is supposed to work.
Patents are bad?
OK, then trade secrets are contracts that are agreed upon in the absence of patents.
You want access to my technology? Then sign my trade secret agreement. You don't want to sign then you don't get access to my technology.
You got a gun that says you can have access to my technology anyway? Then guess what? I never go into business in the first place.
Trade Secrets are bad?
It is a friggin contract. You gonna outlaw all contracts?
Is there any merit to SCO's case?
I dunno, I doubt you know either. If IBM signed a contract that says they would not disclose the technology in question then they should be responsible to what they agreed upon. It is how business works.
You smell IP in anyway related to open source and you kneejerk urrp all over the place.
SCO has not enforced any patents here. You don't like patents then you are gonne get trade secrets. You don't like trade secrets then business is not gonna get done. IBM don't like it, then they did not have to sign the agreement.
I wish there was some there was some way that I could be outside playing basketball, in the rain, and not get wet.
but RedHat, Debian, SuSE and even SGI got there first.
More like leading supplier of hot air and frivolous lawsuits.
utter rubbish
"Okay, if I'm dying, what the fuck do you call SCO on Itanium?" - BSD
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
It would be interesting to have GNU or FSF buy a copy and investigate it to see if there are any GPL violations! What might they find?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Why would I want anything Linux? It is to Unix what a bicycle is to a luxury car. SCO will back me up on that. Wait...
so much for their 64-bit OS.
Privacy International give their Big Brother awards for contributions to the destruction of privacy. Shouldn't the FSF or someone make awards for the contribution to closing software.
PR News Release
SomeHickTown, Utah. (Apr 16, 2003)
The SCO Group has released a Linux server operating system for the 64-bit Intel Itanium processor, the company announced Wednesday. A SCO Product Manager was quoted as saying "As our main revenue stream is based on frivolous lawsuits we thought we'd expand further by deploying a Linux distribution based on a failing server technology - how could consumers not be tempted by this marriage made in hell?"
"SCO's future on Itanium is immense, burning brightly like a flaming retard. SCO on Itanium supports more than 4GB of RAM. Do not believe the Debian infidels when they say otherwise! We are also the cheapest Linux distribution in the world! Anything you are told by the scheming harbingers of doom is a lie."
I could go on all day with this thread.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
What an outpouring of bile against SCO we see here! And how richly deserved!
Do not give this company the time of day. (As if anybody needed to be told.)
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
From the office of Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf (aka Baghdad Bob):
"SCO does not own Linux. It is a trick by the coalition forces! Oh, and UNIXWare 3, 4, 5 and 6 do exist!"
More at 11.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
Not THAT'S funny! I can just see it, the George Foreman Itanium 2 laptop ... for when you just need to have a hot off the grill burger during your next flight!
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
This and the Doubleclick exec being the Privacy Czar had me looking at the calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1st again....
wow, it didn't feel like a year passed....
Two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do - Lew of GO magazine
-"With its new system, SCO is a little late to the Linux on Itanium
2 market."
Yeah, the Itanium 2 gravy train has left the station with those tens of
thousands of happy customers (okay, 'tens' of customers then) and SCO wasn't
on board...Sounds like that Computerworld Itanium 2 bandwagon needs riders.
<laugh>
Comment removed based on user account deletion
and your OS doesn't need to be stable, the battery is dead before the OS has a chance to crash!
Right???
SCO= Slow CEOs OnBoard
Don't Tread on OpenSource
They should not get advertisment from slashdot. Microsoft releases some cool products and features and yet they are barely mentioned at all here on slashdot unless its negative because the editors hate them. Same should apply with SCO.
Cmd Taco and Timothy. If your reading this please do not advertise for SCO. Screw them. Tell them to shove it up there ass unless its something really worthwile or negative.
http://saveie6.com/
The thing I can't wait for is 64-bit laptops with a real advantage over their 32-bit counterparts ;).
Peruse the following link for 64-bit mobile goodness...
http://hw.tadpole.com/html/
(Maybe If I could get one of those laptops, I could finally figure out this "href" thing and make my posts "clicky")
For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
If I'm going to be paying that much for an OS for a piddly little 4-CPU machine, I want someone from IBM or Sun to be available to do onsite support.
:-)
I just recently bought a 4-cpu IBM RS6000 with copper 64-bit processors. The OS license for the AIX 5.1L Unix for _UNLIMITED USERS_ cost a whole whomping $275 above the cost of the hardware.
And I *do* get onsite support with this system
What the hell are they offering that I can't get from RedHat, SuSE, or Debian?
I know others such as RedHat sell Linux distros with similar price tags, however the vendor makes it pretty clear in these cases that most of it is for support.
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
SCO's Linux Server Base version is priced at $599. It comes with no technical support or any kind of warranty.
Can someone just make a copy of their Linux software and distribute it for free? Why are people going to buy from SCO directly?
in our SCO Linux! Never!
Who CARES if sco wants to charge $999 for linux? IF they can pull that off, MORE POWER TO THEM.
Why is it everytime someone charges money for something everyone freaks out?
The whole point of this whole open source/free software is that, within certain licensing constraints, anyone is FREE TO DO what they want with the software, including make money.
Seriously.. I hate SCO as much as the next guy (if not more), but give it a rest.
How has sco harmed you by offering this package? Oh, they haven't?
... as if I (or anyone else) actually gives a fuck about anything SCO/Caldera does, ever again.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
Did SCO just release all of their intellectual property under the GPL?
Could this announcement simply be a move to support the damage claims against IBM. I mean Linux at $999 is like a 20-times-damages modifier.
Open source development is my way of competing with the low-cost programmers in India...
That's "late" as in "the late Arthur Dent".
"For every pleasure there's a tax".
The Man
Linux does not exist. It is a fabrication of some unemployed geek infidels to slander Microsoft. There are no bugs in Windows, never! Our glorious leader Bill Gates has forbidden bugs, therefore there are none! Do not believe them!
Repeal the DMCA!
Hey, didja every notice how their itanium 2 linux price when, flipped upside down, comes to be 666, which is the sign of the beast.. food for thought, don'tcha know :)
-- vranash
Why would anyone shell out money for a first generation 4-way 64-bit system with expensive processors and a proprietary OS when there are much more reliable alternatives from Sun, IBM, and HP? This is an extremely competitive market; what does SCO have to offer that more established brands don't?
And before anyone jumps on me about their OS, consider this: if their Linux distro doesn't use any proprietary technology then you can download the source and roll your own system, which cuts them out of the loop. I don't think this is the case. When it comes to software compatibility Linux wins easily on the desktop but not necessarily on the server, where established Unix vendors have a huge head start.
I don't see the added value in this system.
Anyone know where I can download a free, full linux system for itanium?
Can't find anything on the red hat and suse sites, and the debian distribution I found was only text mode, no X etc. Yet, it took so long just to install such a simple system.
Ok, enough complaining. To regurgitate: does anyone know where I can download a good linux itanium dist for free =) ?? Where? URL's?
#6495ED - cornflower blue
I thought I'd seen your post somewhere before!
You are misstating something though.
The GPL does say that the only way you may legally distribute the software is if you follow the terms regarding source distribution.
If you are NOT distributing the source, then the GPL does not give you the right to distribute the software.. which means if you are distributing it without releasing source, you are distributing in violation of COPYRIGHT law.
Your source STILL does not belong to the public; though you can be sued for copyright violation by the copyright holder. Releasing that source may be one out for you, as then you could cite the GPL as giving you permission to redistribute.
So my point is only that the GPL does not automatically make something free, or automatically open up source. They can always keep it to themselves, and face legal consequences from the copyright holders if they should choose to prosecute.
The reason the "standard parts" clause is important is because, if I sell, say, my version of linux that has, say, a bunch of private libraries (not based on GPL code.. they are totally written by me) included, and then I use GPL code and link against those libraries (perhaps my libs are high performance itanic libs for math, who knows)... and distribute that code.. I am not violationg the GPL by linking aganist proprietary libraries. I claim those libraries are part of my OS, and that OS is the target platform. This is not a stretch of the rules. It's plain as day.
The GPL doesn't make anything free. But if someone chooses to redistribute it, they must supply the source and the software can be further distributed without restriction. If I take, for example, Linux, I am perfectly within my rights to modify it extensively and then not pass it on. As long as I don't pass the modified code outside my organisation, I am fine. I can give binaries to my (internal) users without problems and any secrets can remain in house.
In the case of our friends at SCO, they are accusing IBM of disclosing their technology as part of a Linux distribution. This wouldn't be Itanic code, this is something that they claimed IBM had already released and took from AIX.
If the release that SCO makes includes their code from the existing Linux release, then they are defacto acknowledging the license. If they unpick their code and seperate it, there could be some possibility of keeping it proprietary, but that is all. Putting propietary code into the kernel and distributing it, isn't easy.
In the case of standard libraries, in effect these are already defined by whether or not they are part of a Linux distribution. If I write my own glibc, replacing the distributed glibc, I agree, it is possible to kjeep this propietary. However, this would have to be an integral part of my distribution.
The 'standard' clause allows me to use GPL code linked against a libc that comes with Solaris as binary only. Neither Solaris nor libc has to be there in source form. If The Linux kernel has no private libaries that can be replaces. The GNU tool chain on top of Linux (specifically, glibc) could be replaced. However, this would be very difficult, because the kernel is open, as are the libraries that are nottmally distributed with it.