Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the please-be-polite dept.
AndyFewt writes "TheRegister has an article on the latest form of SCO FUD, their Roadshow. Funded by HP and kicking off on Oct. 7, SCO users throughout the U.S. and Canada can get their chance to go show Darl just how much they "love" SCO. But of course, Linux users are free to attend."
The REAL news
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
At the end of the day who cares about SCO, really? The real news is HP. Are we going to let HP think that it's okay to back SCO. That's the REAL question.
Funded by HP?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
All of the articles I read about Sun on Slashdot end up mentioning Sun "funding" SCO regardless of the fact they were coming up to date on a 10 year old license.
Now, HP is directly funding SCO and nobody has mentioned anything yet. I was under the impression HP was another major friend of Linux who helped in development (such as LVM) and pushed Linux servers.
If this is true, who is on Linux side in the SCO vs IBM battle? Right now, it seems only Red Hat, IBM and the community. 50% of IBM's revenue comes from Global Services. Linux is a perfect opportunity to continue to expand this revenue since they are the only major player with both brand appeal and the size to appeal to almost any customer. With HP directly funding SCO to help them market their products they don't seem like much of a friend.
It looks like the OSS community might need to re-evaluate who their true friends are.
A delicate question to US readers
by
greppling
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have a question to the few American slashdot readers, if there are any:
In a German article on SCO/Cannopy, I recently learned that Darl McBride is a "devout mormon". Now, I have never seen this mentioned anywhere in the many articles on SCO/McBride, even when they were specifically talking about McBride's personality.
Of course, his beliefs do in no way at all affect my factual views on his mission against Linux/GPL. But nevertheless, knowing he is a believing Mormon changes my understanding of him as a person, and possibly of his motivations. Maybe it should not, but it does change my reaction to many of his strongly worded statements.
Now I wonder why I never saw this mentioned in American articles. Is this because Americans don't think it matters? Is this because, while they know it might matter, they want to keep that out of the discussion? Is it an unwritten rule that religion is kept out of controversal discussions? Even when analyzing personalities? Or is it just not widely known that he is Mormon? Or is it, to the contrary, just implicitly assumed by US readers that a person such as McBride is probably strongly religious?
I am posting this despite knowing that it might be misunderstood as being negative on religious people, or religion in general. It is not meant that way. It is just that knowing whether someone is deeply religious or not is an important aspect in understanding his motivations.
Slashdot Mirror
At the end of the day who cares about SCO, really? The real news is HP. Are we going to let HP think that it's okay to back SCO. That's the REAL question.
All of the articles I read about Sun on Slashdot end up mentioning Sun "funding" SCO regardless of the fact they were coming up to date on a 10 year old license.
Now, HP is directly funding SCO and nobody has mentioned anything yet. I was under the impression HP was another major friend of Linux who helped in development (such as LVM) and pushed Linux servers.
If this is true, who is on Linux side in the SCO vs IBM battle? Right now, it seems only Red Hat, IBM and the community. 50% of IBM's revenue comes from Global Services. Linux is a perfect opportunity to continue to expand this revenue since they are the only major player with both brand appeal and the size to appeal to almost any customer. With HP directly funding SCO to help them market their products they don't seem like much of a friend.
It looks like the OSS community might need to re-evaluate who their true friends are.
In a German article on SCO/Cannopy, I recently learned that Darl McBride is a "devout mormon". Now, I have never seen this mentioned anywhere in the many articles on SCO/McBride, even when they were specifically talking about McBride's personality.
Of course, his beliefs do in no way at all affect my factual views on his mission against Linux/GPL. But nevertheless, knowing he is a believing Mormon changes my understanding of him as a person, and possibly of his motivations. Maybe it should not, but it does change my reaction to many of his strongly worded statements.
Now I wonder why I never saw this mentioned in American articles. Is this because Americans don't think it matters? Is this because, while they know it might matter, they want to keep that out of the discussion? Is it an unwritten rule that religion is kept out of controversal discussions? Even when analyzing personalities? Or is it just not widely known that he is Mormon? Or is it, to the contrary, just implicitly assumed by US readers that a person such as McBride is probably strongly religious?
I am posting this despite knowing that it might be misunderstood as being negative on religious people, or religion in general. It is not meant that way. It is just that knowing whether someone is deeply religious or not is an important aspect in understanding his motivations.