Slashdot Mirror


United Linux Dead

DesScorp writes "ZDnet has a story about the impending demise of United Linux, with former general manager Paula Hunter stating that 'the legal entity still exists but I turned the lights out'. While a couple of reasons were given for UL's demise, most of the blame was firmly laid on the shoulders of SCO. As a member of group, their lawsuits killed off any real product development. SCO apparently refused to resign from UL, and Hunter said that 'As long as they remained a member, it remained impossible for us to begin new projects'. Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

322 comments

  1. Dead? by spezz · · Score: 5, Funny
    Man, I hadn't even heard it was dying. Where were the early warning trolls?

    1. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you'd have been paying close attention, you would have noticed it was born dead.

      There were no early warnings because there were no intermediate steps.

    2. Re:Dead? by sik0fewl · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let's see.. here it is.

      Seems to be the only one.. and he was "just kidding"

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
    3. Re:Dead? by Otter · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In any case -- TurboLinux is essentially gone, I haven't heard a peep about Connectiva in at least a year and no one has cared about Caldera Linux in five years. That basically leaves SuSE, which has a new, bigger club to wield against Red Hat now.

      I'm sure the SCO business didn't help but it's not like United Linux was going anywhere anyway. Meanwhile, I notice Bruce Perens and Eric raymond have both showed up to flog their new pet schemes. ;-) I'll go cheer on the "What about Gentoo?" zealots instead.

    4. Re:Dead? by pr0c · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Otter: TurboLinux is essentially gone, I haven't heard a peep about Connectiva in at least a year"

      TurboLinux recently released TurboLinux 10 just a few months ago, they aren't gone.. they've been fairly active too.

      Connectiva just recently released Conectiva Linux 10 TP2 2 days ago.

      Both of these distros are not dead! They have pretty up to date packages and all!

    5. Re:Dead? by ElNotto · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Linux is dead -- long live the Mac!

    6. Re:Dead? by pcraven · · Score: 3, Funny

      Too bad we can't go back and give him mod points for 'insightful' now.

    7. Re:Dead? by Otter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I definitely was unfair to Conectiva, at least. For a small distro, their hackers (Kojima, Tosatti, the KDE guys) make a lot of extremely valuable contributions. Still, the impact they have outside of South America is minimal and I haven't heard much about the distro itself in a while. And in years of reading mailing lists, bug reports, IRC, I've never encountered a TurboLinux user.

    8. Re:Dead? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      I've got TurboLinux on CD...picked up at ComDex in '97 by my parents. :) Never used it, though. Tried Red Hat 5.2 for a couple days, then switched to Debian since all the Linux guys I knew personally used it.

    9. Re:Dead? by pr0c · · Score: 1

      I've never used or encountered a user of either actually that I can recall but I do regularly visit distrowatch to stay up to date.

      The user base may be small for these two distros but the distros themselves are active at least. In my experience people who use smaller distros are quiet about it. It seams like they like what they have and are knowledgeable about it so they need no / little support. That's probably as a result of the majority of the user base being developers or something close to it.

    10. Re:Dead? by starm_ · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Mandrake is great!

    11. Re:Dead? by deanhash · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I heard most Mac users were Queer, Oh I am sorry I mean gay.

    12. Re:Dead? by Otter · · Score: 1

      I gave Conectiva 9 a shot because I love the apt-get support for RPM on Yellow Dog. It looked promising but I couldn't get the installed kernel to work with my trashy SMC winbond ethernet card and didn't feel like messing with compiling a kernel on a fresh, unfamiliar system.

    13. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BSD is dead. can i get a wow TI-93

    14. Re:Dead? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      More correct would be "They essentially don't exist in the US marketplace."

      OTOH, this would have been true of both of them before they entered "United Linux". TurboLinux had left the US market by about a year, and Connectiva hadn't ever entered it. (N.B.: This isn't to say that you couldn't buy them [I don't know], but you really had to search for a vendor. [I.e., a brief search wouldn't find them.])

      Their disappearance left the US market to Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, Debian, Slackware, and a *bunch* of home-grown distros (e.g., Gentoo).

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    15. Re:Dead? by Frodo420024 · · Score: 1
      Man, I hadn't even heard it was dying. Where were the early warning trolls?

      Groklaw.net

      --
      I'm in a Unix state of mind.
    16. Re:Dead? by Fjord · · Score: 1

      C'mon, you didn't have to be Kreskin to predict this.

      --
      -no broken link
    17. Re:Dead? by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      Hey, saying queer is ok now. Haven't you heard of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"?

    18. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe the moderation on some of these posts (notably the Elnotto,GMFTatsujin, and the TI-93 AC post). People here fail to see the humor in poking fun of the trolls who post such inflamatory comments. Then again, perhaps they do get it but just don't care.

    19. Re:Dead? by Tony-A · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where were the early warning trolls?

      They were labeled "SCO".
      Figure that whatever SCO touches will be dead without further notice.

    20. Re:Dead? by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 4, Funny
      How about +1 (Prophetic)?

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    21. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, I hadn't even heard it was dying. Where were the early warning trolls?

      Sorry guys but we're overworked with the BSD and Apple situations as it is. If either of them would just DIE for once then maybe we could move on to something else.

    22. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such a lemming...

    23. Re:Dead? by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"?

      Shouldn't that be "Queer iFor the Straight Guy"?

    24. Re:Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Including TrollTech (makers of the Qt toolkit and the basis for KDE)? They are part owned by SCO/Canopy.

    25. Re:Dead? by KLizard · · Score: 0

      Tosatti - the 2.4 kernel maintainer - left Conectiva months ago (he's working on embededd Linux at Cyclades now) and early this week the company released a note "refocusing" it's business model to cover other distros (they will provide "solutions", no matter what the distro you use).

      I guess they aren't profiting enough to survive only on the distro...

    26. Re:Dead? by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1

      The real reason it died is likely the one I predicted back when UnitedLinux announced it's existence: It was trying to solve the same problems already better solved by Debian.

      --
      Help us build a better map!
  2. SCO being a member of United Linux... by corebreech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is like Madonna running a mirror for suprnova.org, isn't it?

    Or to put it another way, why would SCO join an organization designed to standardize the way in which their IP rights are violated?

    Unless of course they have no IP claims to begin with. Which they don't. And we know that. And so did SCO, at one point in time.

    I don't understand why that fact alone doesn't throw this whole case out.

    1. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Rtsbasic · · Score: 2, Informative

      SCO joined UL before the lawsuits began.

    2. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by corebreech · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But that's my point... doesn't their membership in UL necessarily obviate any IP claims they have on Linux?

      IANAL, but isn't it like how you have to actively defend your trademark, or you lose all your rights to it?

    3. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Java+Pimp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      SCO remained a member (volunarily) after the lawsuits began.

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    4. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No.
      They still support their version of linux just fine. It's the fact that they say IBM put their proprietary code into linux, and that has nothing to do with the fact that they do in fact use Linux.

      Think of it this way. Cokeacola sells coke (proprietary formul) and Dasani (water). Someone takes part of the formula for coke and sells water with the formula they took. Coke now claims they own water, but they don't stop distributing it.

    5. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The point has been already made so many times that it's almost not worth mentioning.

      Yes, SCO/Caldera was very instrumental in Linux development over the years and were involved in Linux Standard Base, UnitedLinux, and a whole bunch of other stuff that they now claim infringes on their IP.

      Every now and then Grokdot or Slashlaw prints a story "Linux Developer worked for SCO!!" as if it were news or something. SCO/Caldera used to be a leading distribution, and their name is all over the kernel.

    6. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by corebreech · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But they want everybody who uses Linux to pay up, including the people who used the distros produced by the other players in United Linux, even though those distributions were free when SCO joined United Linux.

      I think the better analogy is this: CocaCola sells cola. Pepsi and Royal Crown come along and they start selling cola too. Then they all decide to create an organization called United Cola to work on better, um, making their colas taste the same (or something.) Then CocaCola later decides to sue Pepsi and Royal Crown for making cola!

      They can't do that! Their joining United Cola gave tacit approval to Pepsi and Royal Crown to make cola.

      You can't just bait people like this. People start investing in Pepsi and Royal Crown based on CocaCola's implicit consent. Factories are built, delivery trucks are bought, etc.

      There was a time to say "No", and SCO instead said "Yes." So let's move on.

    8. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by wcspxyx · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's more like suprnova.org being mirrored by Milli Vanilli...

      --
      Sig? What sig? Do I have to have a sig!?!?
    9. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is insignificant. I still get all my warez and tunez the old fashioned way. I leach them off of my friendly local BBS.

    10. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by hendridm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > They can't do that! Their joining United Cola gave tacit approval to Pepsi and Royal Crown to make cola.

      Ahhh, but Coke wouldn't have joined the group if they had known that the key to Pepsi's success lies in the fact that they stole the recipe for Sprite years ago and incorporate key ingredients from it into the Pepsi formula. Hell, if it wasn't for that theft, Pepsi never would have been able to compete as a soft drink and Coke wouldn't have had to join such groups in order improve their product since they would have owned the market anyway!

      Collaboration was part of the partnership deal, not trading recipes. They're only trying to get back what's rightfully theirs from the Pepsi infidels.

    11. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      Apparently, they refused to leave after the litigation was initiated. From the stand point of the rest of the members, SCO is an unwelcome member.

    12. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Kent+Recal · · Score: 2

      So why doesn't CocaCola just tell us what they claim Pepsi has stolen?

      $ find /usr/src/linux -iname "sprite.h" | wc -l
      0
      $

    13. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by hendridm · · Score: 1

      > So why doesn't CocaCola just tell us what they claim Pepsi has stolen?

      Fletcher: Your honor, I object!
      Judge: And why is that, Mr. Reed?
      Fletcher: Because it's devastating to my case!

    14. Re:SCO being a member of United Linux... by Negativeions101 · · Score: 0

      You better be fucking joking

      --

      I'm not anti-microsoft. I'm anti-bullshit. Which means I'm anti-microsoft.
  3. Maybe by Cipster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

    That would depend on the agreements they had signed. It might have just been easier for everyone else to pull out and just reform a different group at a later time.

    1. Re:Maybe by ePhil_One · · Score: 1

      Yeah, now they'll have to form the Uniform Linux consortium, or perhaps the Union of Linux distributions, or ...

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    2. Re:Maybe by vinton · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, the No Darls Club.

    3. Re:Maybe by migurski · · Score: 5, Funny
      It might have just been easier for everyone else to pull out and just reform a different group at a later time.

      ...Like an open source No Homers Club

    4. Re:Maybe by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      I don't know who you are, I've never met you, but I'm willing to hate you because you beat me to that! :)

    5. Re:Maybe by Nurseman · · Score: 1
      That would depend on the agreements they had signed. It might have just been easier for everyone else to pull out and just reform a different group at a later time

      My first thought exactly, why fight them, just leave them sitting alone in their own FUD.

      --
      Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
    6. Re:Maybe by danidude · · Score: 2, Insightful
      t might have just been easier for everyone else to pull out and just reform a different group at a later time.

      Except that the credibility of the new group would be very damaged. SCO's FUD worked on that aspect, unfortunally: seem to have killed a nice corporative linux project :(.

      --
      - no sig.
    7. Re:Maybe by migurski · · Score: 1

      This guy beat me. :\

    8. Re:Maybe by AlfredoLambda · · Score: 0

      Splitters!

    9. Re:Maybe by Kazymyr · · Score: 1

      Beware - no Darls still means they're allowed to have 1 Darl.

      --
      I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
    10. Re:Maybe by tloh · · Score: 1

      couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?

      Perhaps they were afraid of being sued by SCO? :-P

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    11. Re:Maybe by jomegat · · Score: 3, Funny
      Yeah, now they'll have to form the Uniform Linux consortium, or perhaps the Union of Linux distributions, or ...

      ...or Reunited Linux

      --

      In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not.

    12. Re:Maybe by Cipster · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can definitely see SCO come back with a lawsuit. "The members of the United Linux group learned our trade secrets then pulled out. We are suing for $10 billion!"

      I should not give them any ideas....

    13. Re:Maybe by disposable60 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Untied Linux?

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
  4. is this SCO's fault? by andih8u · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Novell pulled SUSE out of it already. Was that due to SCO or did they just not want to be part of it anymore?

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    1. Re:is this SCO's fault? by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Novell pulled SUSE out of it already. Was that due to SCO or did they just not want to be part of it anymore?

      Yes.

      KFG

    2. Re:is this SCO's fault? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is that SuSE already had "vendor certification" from Oracle, IBM, and everyone else. I can't figure out why they joined this loser club to begin with.

    3. Re:is this SCO's fault? by invisik · · Score: 1

      What's SUSE to do now? All of SUSE's server products are based on United Linux 1.0. Do they need to do some quick back-peddling to get a product base again?

      -m

      --
      http://www.invisik.com
    4. Re:is this SCO's fault? by rking · · Score: 1

      What's SUSE to do now? All of SUSE's server products are based on United Linux 1.0.

      I thought that UnitedLinux 1.0 was based on SuSE's server products.

  5. And I can only count the seconds... by Cutriss · · Score: 1

    Until I see someone post the inevitable +5, Funny "Netcraft confirms:" post...

    --
    "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
    1. Re:And I can only count the seconds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You like to count backwards?

    2. Re:And I can only count the seconds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Netcraft confirms your dick is small?

      How's that?

    3. Re:And I can only count the seconds... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Until I see someone post the [...] "Netcraft confirms:" post

      What, like the FIRST FUCKING POST MADE??? Seriously, look at the page. I browse at 1 and it was the first thing I read.

  6. Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A".... by tcopeland · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...as of May, 2003 (seems to have disappeared since then) was this:


    Q: How does this action affect SCO's involvement with UnitedLinux?
    A: SCO is a founding member of the UnitedLinux consortium. With that said, SCO
    Linux Server 4.0, Powered by UnitedLinux sales will be suspended with this
    announcement. SCO will continue to fulfill its obligations to the UnitedLinux consortium.


    Truly, a masterful side-stepping of the question.
    1. Re:Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A".... by MuParadigm · · Score: 5, Informative


      What obligations? Paying SuSE? The UL base was pretty much created and maintained by SuSE, with the other vendors supposedly making their own "add-on" modifications. I don't think SCO/Caldera ever actually added anything, though.

      Hell, SCO never even changed the name on the kernel source package, which stated pretty clearly that it came from SUSE.

    2. Re:Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A".... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Maybe SCO provided them with legal advice :)

    3. Re:Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A".... by Maxon · · Score: 1

      I actually got two United Linux related patches from a SCO employee for an open source project I (sortof) maintain. One patch was to make my project work better with UL, the other was a packaging .spec file to create a UL package of my project.

      I actually got these patches sometime AFTER SCO got into the law suit business...

    4. Re:Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A".... by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      That's interesting. Could you tell if they were developed by SCO or SuSE?

  7. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Instead of money going to Finland, IT managers around the world can concentrate on buying American-made Microsoft software, built by American engineers, packaged in the US and sold everywhere in the world.

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "built by American engineers"

      and/or engineers in Bangalore, India.

    2. Re:Good by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, but America has absorbed Linus, just as it absorbed Albert Einstein, Louis Chevrolet, Werner von Braun and Janos von Neumann.

      Linux is American, don'cha know?

      All the "3) profit???" stops here.

      KFG

    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they chose to come here, doesn't that say something about America? Hmm?

    4. Re:Good by kfg · · Score: 1

      If they chose to come here, doesn't that say something about America? Hmm?

      Certainly.

      KFG

    5. Re:Good by kalidasa · · Score: 2, Funny

      We are America. Finland is irrelevant. Iraq is irrelevant. We will add their technological distinction to our own. They will be assimilated.

  8. Slightly off topic by jlechem · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live in Utah and we have a little weekly paper calld the Salt Lake City Weekly. This week they had an article on the whole SCO debacle. It can be read here. Not a whole lot on the UL effort but an intereting read into the shennagings going on here. I just was reading it on lunch at work and came back to this.

    --
    Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
    1. Re:Slightly off topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you submit the story to Slashdot in the Caldera section?
      Many people were busy yesterday, this should be a refresher.

    2. Re:Slightly off topic by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

      Yes, we know. Slashdot already posted an article linking to it.

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
    3. Re:Slightly off topic by Wakkow · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That article was in the daily SCO story posted yesterday. However, you were modded up so I guess people didn't see it then. =)

    4. Re:Slightly off topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're encouraging a dupe!? FOAD.

    5. Re:Slightly off topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes we know it was posted yesterday. The fact that it was posted yesterday was posted earlier.

      (Sorry, couldn't resist)

    6. Re:Slightly off topic by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      THAT'S why the editors repost stories all the time. It's not because they have memories that last under 24-hours, but because some of their readers do too!

    7. Re:Slightly off topic by scotch · · Score: 1
      You assume he was modded up "informative" for the link to the duped local newsrag article. I disagree, it's obious he was modded up for these portions of his post:

      I live in Utah ...

      Very informative. I didn't know jlechem lived in Utah. Did you know he lived in Utah? I would guess few slashdot readers knew that. Now we all do. If I'm ever in Utah, I know I can pop over to jlechem's house for a beer and nachos and Mormon apologetics.

      I just was reading it on lunch at work ...

      More +1 informative revelations from jlechem.

      Good stuff, I'm sure you'll agree, so be kind to the moderators on this one.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
  9. SCO ploy to get "Linux Dead" in news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Come on, boys, that trick is as old as the hairpiece on Darl's head.

  10. Well-thought out plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Begin technical and marketing platform standardization organization to unify the disparate linux vendors with you as the implied leader.
    2. Sue or threaten to sue anyone who uses or sells linux, unifying the entire linux community against you
    3. There is no step 3... there is no step 3!!!
  11. Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    a beowulf cluster of dead distros!

    1. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...with Hot Grits(tm) poured down their pants!

    2. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a beowulf cluster of dead distros!

      isn't that a John Lennon song?

    3. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about one undead distro?

    4. Re:Imagine by dzelenka · · Score: 1

      Natalie Portman is a dead distro, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Bah!
    5. Re:Imagine by tindur · · Score: 1

      John Lennon is dead and The Beatles is dead. Does that count as a cluster?

    6. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      clusterfuck?

  12. "United" Linux by daeley · · Score: 1

    I'm afraid that the "United Linux Dead" is in danger of being truer than merely the UL organization's demise. SCOffing is quite popular, and well deserved, but that doesn't make SCO and their ilk any less dangerous.

    Divide and conquer is a cliche for a reason: it works.

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
  13. plans for future by Savatte · · Score: 5, Funny

    well, if they are dead, they should open source the code.

    oh wait...

    1. Re:plans for future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was just thinking "How could "open-source" be dead?", based on /. posts alone, Linux has found a permanent home, it's chance of dying are 0 to NULL.

    2. Re:plans for future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux may not be dead, but your sense of humor is.

    3. Re:plans for future by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      or at least leave an auditable paper trail so we can verify it.

      --
      What?
  14. Didn't see this one coming by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm pretty sure that 'united' doesn't mean 'backstabbing'... It's about the only thing they could do and keep some shred of dignity for the partner companies...

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  15. Don't worry United Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    Howard Dean can offer an inspiring concession speech.

    BWAHAHAHAHA!!

  16. Wrong terminology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    > Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?

    This is Slashdot. Don't you mean begs the question? ;)

    1. Re:Wrong terminology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, to beg the question actually means "to assume the very thing you are asking to be true"...
      at least that's what it used to mean until some moron started using the phrase to mean "forcing the question"

  17. Re: United Linux is Dead by DoctorPepper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which only goes to prove the old adage:

    "One rotten apple spoils the entire bunch".

    --

    No matter where you go... there you are.
  18. Alternative Group by Seek_1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why didn't the other members of UnitedLinux simply form a new, 'identical-except-for-litigating-scum' group.

    They could call it "UnitedAgainstSCOLinux"... or maybe just the "NoSCOs Club"?

    1. Re:Alternative Group by gedeco · · Score: 1

      Why?
      SCO is violating the GNU in more then one way.
      This should be reason enough to kick them out off a consortium wich is based upon the GNU.

      Oh yes, the contracts ...

    2. Re:Alternative Group by StarWreck · · Score: 1

      How about a "Counter-Sue SCO into oblivion Club". Have every Open Source user, programmer, business, book author, etc... launch an independent lawsuit against SCO. Or better yet, a Class Action Lawsuit against SCO.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    3. Re:Alternative Group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't call it "NoSCOs". There is very solide presidence in the Simpsons where the "No Homer_s_ club was allowed exactly one Homer. The club will need to be called "NoSCO" to prevent any SCO from joining.

    4. Re:Alternative Group by markhb · · Score: 5, Funny

      I *hope* you meant that they are violating the GPL. "Violating the GNU" brings up a whole other set of connotations, some entailing a risk of contracting anthrax....

      --
      Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  19. SCO go to bed... by jimmi_bob · · Score: 1

    you insensitive clod!

    --
    Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government." - Lenny Bruce
  20. Id think... by Soothh · · Score: 0

    that them being a member of a linux org would have been enough that, even IF they had IP in the linux code, that right there is saying, linux is ok, we are giving it away would be enough to dismiss in the courts eyes they cant claim any rights

    WTFE

    --
    We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
  21. Gordon Haff by iminplaya · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The Illuminati did it. "It's good that UnitedLinux is fading, Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff said...

    --
    What?
    1. Re:Gordon Haff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Error... unterminated string constant. Post aborted.

  22. The replacement is already here by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Informative
    The UserLinux project is United Linux done right. Debian base, broad membership rather than just 4 companies, equal partnership for all, nobody locked out. Please check out the planning wiki at http://userlinux.com/ . We will coordinate our release with that of Debian "Sarge".

    Thanks

    Bruce

    1. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brave of you, Bruce. I expect the anti-Gnome trolls to be along in a few seconds.

    2. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      United Linux done right.

      Hmmm, isn't that like saying "The Ford Festiva is the Fiesta done right?" Like an old Indian adage I used to hear. No matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd.

    3. Re:The replacement is already here by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bruce, you're trolling. How about a "this is sad, but we've created UserLinux as a viable alternative"? That would at least be a little more sensitive to those who might have an emotional attachment to United Linux.

    4. Re:The replacement is already here by jas79 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Last time I checked 4 companies are more than 0 companies. Did I miss some press releases about companies supporting userlinux?

    5. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      equal partnership for all, nobody locked out.

      except for KDE of course...
    6. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We will coordinate our release with that of Debian "Sarge".

      So middle of 2005 then?

    7. Re:The replacement is already here by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      Please check out the planning wiki at

      Am I the only one who reads "planning wiki" and thinks of some witch doctor type creature from Scooby Doo with a laptop covered in penguin stickers?

    8. Re:The replacement is already here by slycrel · · Score: 1

      I don't mind the plug at all, but sheesh. Nothing like kicking someone when they're down...

    9. Re:The replacement is already here by kfg · · Score: 1

      Well, "United" Linux was pretty much a dead duck from the get go.

      I hate to play the pessimist, but I tend to think many of the same forces that birthed United Linux stillborn will play against UserLinux.

      That said I certainly think that what you're doing has worth, whereas United Linux never really did that I could see. So more power to you.

      KFG

    10. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      those who might have an emotional attachment to United Linux.

      Yeah, all three of them.

    11. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "you can't polish a turd."

      "You can if you freeze it." - Kubrick

    12. Re:The replacement is already here by PetiePooo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The UserLinux project is United Linux done right.

      *cough* *c SHAMELESS PLUG!!! ough* *ahem* Err... excuse me.

      Bruce, don't get me wrong, I like you and the work you do. I've got you on my friends list. I'll probably fiddle with UserLinux when it comes out. But this is close to inexcusible.

      United Linux was, to my understanding, a corporate response to RHEL ES/AS, the "server" products. My understanding of UserLinux is that it is a grassroots response to RHEL WS, the "desktop" product. Of course, any Linux can be used to run server apps, but the point is UserLinux's target is the desktop. United Linux had plans of certifying the "big iron" apps like Oracle, SAP, etc., that large corporations feel they need support for. How long before I'll be able to get Oracle to support their latest datacenter DB product on UserLinux like I could right now on RHEL AS? I'm afraid it'll take more than a grassroots effort to compete with Redhat's server lineup...

    13. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you've been on the internet long enough, wiki would never remind you of Scooby Doo.

    14. Re:The replacement is already here by tepples · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      SHAMELESS PLUG!!!

      What about this plug?

      (dumb lameness filter)

    15. Re:The replacement is already here by bogie · · Score: 1

      So your going to use Sarge as a base and then forever split from Debian's base Right? Because if your going to stay synced with mainline Debian I don't see how this is going to be a useful project that stays current, especially when you consider Debian's horrible installer.

      btw from your white paper on Fedora

      "I fear that a volunteer developer would be making himself an unpaid employee of Red Hat rather than a member of a real community."

      Couldn't disgaree more with this FUD. Fedora is completely Fee and GPL thus ANY contributions are not in waste.

      But I guess because of your agenda it seemed to make sense at the time to attack the other viable popular Free community based project.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    16. Re:The replacement is already here by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Some of them have communicated with me privately. Their main request was "make us a path out of this mess and into getting the job done". I believe their attachment was more to Linux and the GNU System than to a commercial alliance created to market against Red Hat.

      Thanks

      Bruce

    17. Re:The replacement is already here by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful
      *cough* *c SHAMELESS PLUG!!! ough* *ahem* Err... excuse me.

      I get more done becuase of my chutzpah and sometimes, I admit, arrogance. You gotta get attention for ideas to get them done.

      UserLinux targets both desktop and server. Users employ servers too, just remotely.

      We can get Oracle on board. It might take some time, but we can get their customers to bring them there.

      Bruce

    18. Re:The replacement is already here by pyros · · Score: 1
      Am I the only one who reads "planning wiki" and thinks of some witch doctor type creature from Scooby Doo with a laptop covered in penguin stickers?

      Yep.

    19. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That would at least be a little more sensitive to those who might have an emotional attachment to United Linux.

      I'm not politically correct you insensitive clod!

    20. Re:The replacement is already here by inode_buddha · · Score: 1
      Um, allow me to step in here and kick your nuts on Bruce Peren's behalf.

      Since when is linux just about companies and not communities?

      HTH, HAND

      --
      C|N>K
    21. Re:The replacement is already here by gregarican · · Score: 1

      Perhaps since companies and groups distributing version of it are trying to gain ground on a huge corporate juggernaut like Microsoft as a legitimate business solution?

    22. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm afraid it'll take more than a grassroots effort to compete with Redhat's server lineup...

      How about I throw in a sweet ass web site. Would that make you happy?

      -Bruce

    23. Re:The replacement is already here by inode_buddha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True enough, but ISTR that Linux itself is a community project. If the corps. want to play, thet's fine with me; I'll support them like always (with my wallet). What I object to was the implication that NotACorporation == NoVoice. In other words, I see Bruce's project primarily as a community project and the parent poster seemed to be dissing it because no companies were seen there. As if that was the only form of credibility.

      --
      C|N>K
    24. Re:The replacement is already here by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Well, that's the most appropiate description for a wiki that I have read in a while.

    25. Re:The replacement is already here by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      How about feeding the achievements back into debian?
      I mean, is there a reason not to?

      If you want to split (for whatever reason) just do it at the package-level, have one for "userfriendly" and one for "old fashioned"(?) for the affected apps.

      I don't see a problem there, I rather see the UL-project as a nice developement and experimentation testbed. Most of the stuff they aim for (like hardware autodetection and such) is just a matter of proper scripting. Once the scripting is done and the necessary "helper"-applications are written it shouldn't be a big deal to adapt the goodness for debian.

    26. Re:The replacement is already here by rsax · · Score: 1
      The UserLinux project is United Linux done right. Debian base

      Like another poster pointed out just how strictly will you adhere to the Debian base? The issue that I have with Debian is that their stable release has horribly outdated packages; for example the current stable release has Cyrus packages dating back to version 1.5! On another note I agree with your decision on not going with KDE regarding QT commerical licensing reasons but using that same logic I would think that PostgreSQL would be a more logical choice for the default database server instead of MySQL. Either way I look forward to seeing what develops out of UserLinux.

    27. Re:The replacement is already here by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      Possibly Bruce, but in the meantime don't you think the throwing to the wolves of the userbase that made them as popular as they (redhat) are will have a longer term debilitating effect on their sales? If they don't have us little millions of us home "download it for free" bunch using their stuff and promoting it all over the place, where would they be today?

      Certainly I think I can guarantee that they wouldn't have that present market share without us, whom they've now relegated to be alpha testers. 'scuse me?

      Personally, I think the next time I lose a boot drive and have to re-install, it will be something like mepis, just so I can promote and support the home town folks, he's only about 50 miles up the interstate from me.

      Cheers, Gene

    28. Re:The replacement is already here by Xuranova · · Score: 1

      Ok I'm apparently not "in the know" so I'll ask a question with probably an obvious answer:

      Why market against Redhat? are they the MS of Linux?

      --
      "There is no real right or wrong, just what the majority accepts at the time."
    29. Re:The replacement is already here by CentrX · · Score: 1

      First, it seems they would stay synched with either the testing or unstable branch of Debian, which develop relatively rapidly, in distinct ways, and such tracking would proceed toward concurrent releases.

      Second, the installer for Sarge and subsequent releases of Debian will be an entirely rewritten on, without basis on the previously used "boot-floppies". That installer provides a flexible modular framework which allows easier development toward any user-friendly thing you like.

      --

      "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
    30. Re:The replacement is already here by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Just as an aside from all this -- you know, Red Hat isn't perfect and I realize that "diversity" is a really good justification for providing sizeable competitors. However, they still do a really, awfully good job of sticking to OSS ideology. They donate more money to projects than they need to, they have generous terms (none of the delayed ISO releases that SuSE has), try quite hard to stay OSS (I remember when they dumped Netscape's software -- pretty early on, and earlier than was probably a good idea. They were clearly trying to stimulate Mozilla growth at the cost of some of their own appeal.) They really are, of the major distributors, one of the nicest of the lot (or to be cynical, feel that it's important to consistently act as if they are nice). They don't try for lockout -- there are good, solid reasons that they sell so many copies. Honestly, if I were running RH, I probably wouldn't have played so nicely.

      Some of what UL does (and I'm sure I'm probably woefully uninformed) seems to not be as useful as what the LSB does, where *everyone* got on board:

      * I wish that real, solid cross-distro and backwards-binary compatibility could be in place -- that I could buy a binary software package and use it on any distro. Most of the games I purchased from Loki two years or so ago, already don't run on the current version of Red Hat, and that's just within a distribution, just two releases down the line. It's so much easier to package and distribute binary software packages on Windows that it's frusterating. I've *seen* folks trying to do it, and it's the primary reason that I've seen vendor people avoiding Linux support -- you can't just provide "a Linux binary package".

      * There's no agreed-upon-way to package a daemon. Init systems differ -- there's no standard all-distros-have-it command to use to register/unregister a daemon for system startup. Such a script could operate differently at the back end, but...Linux is just lacking in such standardized wrappers. Currently, some poor sap has to volunteer to package it for Debian, PLD and RH usually have to do the packaging themselves, etc.

      * There's no standard meta-spec file that allows one to generate final-quality RPM/DEB/whathaveyou files. Authors would probably *love* to write a single file (preferably with simpler, more standardized syntax than the RPM spec) that can be fed into RPM to produce an RPM and DEB to produce a DEB.

      *

    31. Re:The replacement is already here by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Speaking of commercial customers, will UserLinux be targeting fortune 500 servers and workstations like the other distro's that claim these goals or hitting the real sweet spot... small and medium sized business that everybody ignores.

      Small and medium business it seems to me has more to offer. They are as numerous like the stars like home users, and though they rarely have millions to spend they generally spend thousands on a regular basis... that adds up to alot.

      I suppose the real question is, will Userlinux be working toward a QuickBOOKS/Peachtree replacement... for most small/medium (5-100 employee is what I define as small/medium, not the stock market definition) outfits this is what is really missing.

      The other is an access compatible app. With those we could commence to deploying 100% linux solutions to a couple hundred such outfits for which our company IS the IT department in central IL.

      It will be kind of nice to be able to advise to our customers to spend that $5000 contracting a feature they miss to their accounting app instead of replacing it and retraining.

    32. Re:The replacement is already here by wathead · · Score: 1

      Yea but no KDE.
      apt-get KDE . Try that out in the sticks on dailup.
      I dont have the luxery of broadband available to me.
      But fedora has KDE.
      Keep up the good work though.
      I guess that just leaves slack and lindows with a default KDE

    33. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an Oracle customer: No thanks.

      I'll continue to use SuSE as my basis for Oracle under Linux. I'd prefer some new SPARC's w/Solaris as the base system - but sometimes economy hinders that.

      Sorry, UserLinux with Debian as a base is NOT something I'd want to touch in this setting.

      (There is quite probable some people that would want to do it, but I'm not one of them ;)

    34. Re:The replacement is already here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on, it's not Windows we're talking about here... KDE isn't that big, and I quite happily apt-get upgraded kde for many months on dial-up.

    35. Re:The replacement is already here by Nevyn · · Score: 1
      I get more done becuase of my chutzpah and sometimes, I admit, arrogance. You gotta get attention for ideas to get them done.

      This is the same mantra that RMS cries, correcting people to say "GNU/Linux" gets attention and possibley gets people who will help. It misses the point that everytime you do it that way you alienate people too.

      We can get Oracle on board. It might take some time, but we can get their customers to bring them there.

      Oracle is one of the more important ISVs, but there are more than a few ISVs certified for RHEL. And just saying "user demand" will solve all your problems is provabley not true ... where's the debian or gentoo certification. I know United Linux had hell to get certification from Oracle, and they had something that looks like a std. RHEL box that people are the corporate users are used to.

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
  23. HOW THE HELL IS THIS INSIGHTFUL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "SCO is bad", now mod me up assholes.

  24. Unforsceen SCO Cluster by necrogram · · Score: 1

    yet another unforsceen cluter from SCO's temper tantrum.... I had great hopes for a standard linux base such as UL. May Darl get ass raped by an army of rabid penguins

    1. Re:Unforsceen SCO Cluster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry...I think once this all shakes out and it is shown for the stock pump and dump that it truly is, he'll have worse than penguins sodomizing him once he arrives at federal "pound me in the ass" prison.

  25. New birth of a good idea? by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?

    The agreement as it was written was probably done before anyone had any idea that SCO was going to act in such a bizarre manner.

    Since SCO wouldn't leave, this would be about the only way to create a new United Linux without Darl McBride tainting it.

    1. Re:New birth of a good idea? by glpierce · · Score: 1

      'Hippie' business ventures (characterized in this instance by an assumption that everyone involved will 'stay cool') aren't a good idea. You can't base a big project like this on the hopes that no one will change their mind or behave in a 'bizarre manner'. UL was doomed from the start - never underestimate the necessity and power of a well-written contract.

      --
      G
    2. Re:New birth of a good idea? by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      It's unwise to expect all your partners to stick to the course despite their own individual setbacks, or to always be fully open with you, or to all have the same goals as the project develops that they did when it started.
      I'm not sure though, that there is any way to write a contract that protects against SCO type behavior. Once a company keeps on inflicting damage to others despite racking up incredible amounts of eventual damage in return, what can you do to it?
      "Hah, we're going to sue you for all the assets you have left after 20 other companies finish squeezing your corporate carcass dry."? "Ha, we're going to seek criminal charges - we know the 6,384 years consecutive you already face won't deter you, but the 20 extra we'll get added to it will"?

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  26. Re: United Linux is Dead by sfjoe · · Score: 3, Funny



    A better adage:

    Put a tablespoon of wine in a barrel of shit and you still have a barrel of shit.
    Put a tablespoon of shit in a barrel of wine and you have a barrel of shit.

    --
    It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
  27. Certified Software? by abrotman · · Score: 1

    what about the software certified to run on united linux(like oracle)? Does it still run on Suse/TurboLinux/conectiva? The way that UnitedLinux was supposed to work always confused me a bit.

    Maybe Oracle will certify Debian.

    1. Re:Certified Software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, United Linux is SuSE. Same difference. Oracle support SuSE long before United Linux, so yes it should still work.

      In many ways, United Linux could only be because of SuSE. SuSE was the only member to really produce something. Caldera could have, if they didn't get that new CEO. And the other member(s) are too small to make much difference. So with out Caldera, United Linux is SuSE.

      There's one big reason why United Linux is dead. SCO (Caldera) is suing Novell (SuSE). They aren't ever going to work together again, because only one of them can exist the way Darl has acted.

  28. United Linux Dead? by squidfood · · Score: 4, Funny


    Is this a support group for vampire geekheads?
    Not to be confused with Linux Dead United, the zombie penguin football team.

  29. Create a new distrobution by shuz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So UL died. Financial chaos insues. Just create another distro based on what you learned. I find that Linux distrobutions are successfull based on the research that was done to them. Debian has apt and has official packages controlled and standardized. Redhat pushes ease of use with a corporate twist. SuSE has european nations in its grasp and has a little of column A and a little of column B in it, a well balanced distro you might say. Slackware is the tried and true throw everything in and let the user sort it out "hackers" distro. Though its become a lot more friendly to use and is evolving nicely. United Linux wanted to take all the ideas and somehow work them into one. Thier goal was to make a standard set of packages what would work seamlessly together and be user friendly. They wanted to create a set of rules to follow when adding non-official packages and work on schemes to make packages work together and not break each other be accident. There goals have never been met by any distrobution to date. I still see hope for what they were trying to do. Just move on and do it under a different name. Rework management AKA reorganize and try again. The little distro the could so to speak. /rant off

    --
    There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
    1. Re:Create a new distrobution by starm_ · · Score: 1

      Hey is there a web site that lists projects that could to be done on Linux? You know, things that need improvements.
      Graduate students are always looking for course projects ideas, or subjects for their thesis. The nice thing about it is that whatever code comes out of this, it sould be well researched and documented with research papers etc.
      Just wondering

    2. Re:Create a new distrobution by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      Agreed. IMHO the most challenging aspect of linux is its diversity. I mean, I know what I like, but here we're trying to agree on standards - not an easy task. Of course that diversity could also be a strength *and* a weakness all at once.

      --
      C|N>K
  30. Why include SCO at all? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
    Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

    Depends on the by-laws of the organization. But it should be easy to re-form the group without SCO.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  31. Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all read it on /. yesterday, dupe-man.

  32. United BSD? by tommck · · Score: 0, Troll

    Are you sure that wasn't United BSD??

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  33. Troll Mod This! by s4m7 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It is now official - Netcraft has confirmed: UnitedLinux is dying

    Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered UnitedLinux community when
    recently IDC confirmed that UnitedLinux accounts for less than a fraction of 1
    percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft
    survey which plainly states that UnitedLinux has lost more market share, this
    news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. UnitedLinux is collapsing
    in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in
    the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict UnitedLinux's
    future. The hand writing is on the wall: UnitedLinux faces a bleak future. In
    fact there won't be any future at all for UnitedLinux because UnitedLinux is dying.
    Things are looking very bad for UnitedLinux. As many of us are already aware,
    UnitedLinux continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of
    blood.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    SuSe leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of SuSe. How
    many users of Caldera are there? Let's see. The number of SuSe versus
    Caldera posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there
    are about 7000/5 = 1400 Caldera users. Connectiva posts on Usenet are about
    half of the volume of Caldera posts. Therefore there are about 700 users
    of Connectiva. A recent article put TurboLinux at about 80 percent of the UnitedLinux
    market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 TurboLinux users.
    This is consistent with the number of TurboLinux Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of SCO, abysmal sales and so on, TurboLinux
    went out of business and was taken over by SCO who sell another
    troubled OS. Now SCO is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet
    another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that UnitedLinux has steadily declined in market share.
    UnitedLinux is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If
    UnitedLinux is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. UnitedLinux
    continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this
    point in time. For all practical purposes, UnitedLinux is dead.

    Fact: UnitedLinux is dead

    --
    This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    1. Re:Troll Mod This! by Blob+Pet · · Score: 1

      There needs to be some sort of "Netcraft Confirms is Dying" article generator.

      --
      "...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
    2. Re:Troll Mod This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called a text notepad. With search and replace.

    3. Re:Troll Mod This! by Blob+Pet · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of something along the lines of this

      --
      "...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
    4. Re:Troll Mod This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guys, to get +5, Troll, you're supposed to mod it down once from 5 to +4, Troll, then mod it 'underrated' so that it becomes '+5, Troll' -- now go back & try that again ;)

  34. NOT INFORMATIVE. IT WAS ON /. YESTERDAY. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    This was a slashdot story yesterday

    Now linking to day old stories is "Informative"?

  35. Re: United Linux is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, SCO, are they the spoon or the barrel?

  36. Re:It's a shame by mark_lybarger · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    i haven't figured out /. quite yet, i still see posts from trolls^^^ er foes, but i do see the pretty red dot. ..you're a troll...

  37. MOD PARENT DOWN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    MOD PARENT DOWN!! IMPERSONATION!

    Look closely at his name! RAY_R_NOND? looks like raymond but spelled rayrnond. See it?

    See the FAQ

    1. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the poster has a legitimate reason for posting his opinion. Have you considered that his nickname may be his real name? ESR is well known around the internet. Why shouldn't he be allowed to post here on Slashdot?

    2. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at his homepage link. It's important to call a spade a spade.

  38. No Homers by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
    "NoSCOs Club"

    That would violate Matt Groening's patent on the "No **** Club," where **** represents "Homer," "SCO", "Darl," or any other cartoonish entity.

  39. That was quick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never liked it really, but wow, wham bam thank you ma'am see you later.

    The whole idea (in my mind, your opinion may differ)was just an attempt to somehow make a stab at market dominance. As if there could be such a thing.

  40. SCO - "I'll just get me coat" by jimmi_bob · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the title of the SCO website is SCO grows your business. unless of course you rearrange the word unix, put an 'L' in front, and give it away for free.

    also found this link - SCO says "Linux hurts US". is this company into sadomasochism?

    --
    Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government." - Lenny Bruce
    1. Re:SCO - "I'll just get me coat" by stuffedmonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was a typo - Darl meant to say "SCO 0wnz0rs your buisness" - but spell check changed it :)

    2. Re:SCO - "I'll just get me coat" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do grow your business though. Since I started corresponding with them, I've had to triple the size of my legal depatment.

  41. Not dead - just renamed - DLWG by swordboy · · Score: 4, Informative

    They just reincarnated as Desktop Linux Working Group. No SCO this time...

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    1. Re:Not dead - just renamed - DLWG by Feztaa · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for the "No Homers" club... ;)

    2. Re:Not dead - just renamed - DLWG by MrResistor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's a totally different beast, actually. UnitedLinux was a standardized server distro, and as such was about as far removed from doing anything with the desktop as you can be while still running a modern OS.

      DLWG may include the same players, and that should be no surprise as those are the distros that have shown in the past that they recognize the need to work together, but that doesn't make it the same thing.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    3. Re:Not dead - just renamed - DLWG by Kumochisonan · · Score: 1

      The No McBride's club you mean...

      Which excludes Darl's 'I *am* a Lawyer, Honest!' brother as well.

      --
      kill elrond
      take elrond
      put elrond in cupboard
  42. United Linux is dead. Long live United Linux. by Cleon · · Score: 1

    Well, it's a shame, but it was kinda stillborn to begin with. TurboLinux never went anywhere--it made a small splash, then died. Lindows (or whatever it'll be forced to change its name to) has had much more success.

    I really doubt UL will be the last such effort; Linux development is so much of a cooperative/collaborative effort that new "ULs" will spring up. Certainly once SCO's dead.

    (Hey! Maybe we should start a "dead pool" on when SCO finally dies/gets bought out.)

    --
    Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
  43. Who benefits from the corruption in United Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft benefits from the corruption in UL. Look for the strings on the SCO scarecrow. T

    Q: Why not Sun benefitting?
    A: Because Linux brings more users to a platform that mutualy benefits Sun's Solaris OS IP.

    Q: Why benefecial to Sun to have Linux everywhere, they're Unix?
    A: Because they can specialize where Linux perhaps never will, TPP (aka Toilette Paper Protocol). Geeks need to wipe their ass on someone's IP, so Sun it is!

  44. What??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is the replacement already here? There's zero companies involved with this from the looks of the Wiki site. The page has a nice "just stubs" commenting the voidness and lack of content. Would'a, could'a, should'a. I could be President if only I had enough votes.

  45. Sometimes dying is a good thing. by dominion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been involved in a lot of activist and community projects, and the one thing I've learned is that sometimes it's not a bad thing that a project ends.

    The worst thing is to stay together when everybody in a bitchy mood and one person's causing trouble and the project really isn't going anywhere.

    Usually it's better to quietly end the project, say your farewells, take some time off, and then start new.

    Food for thought.

    1. Re:Sometimes dying is a good thing. by Dracolytch · · Score: 1

      As is mirrored in nature: The death of one thing leaves room for new things to grow.

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
    2. Re:Sometimes dying is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>The worst thing is to stay together when everybody in a bitchy mood and one person's causing trouble and the project really isn't going anywhere.

      I wonder if that applies to Dean's campaign right now too?

  46. i think its quite simple by relrelrel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    SCO can be blamed for this, but when it comes down to it UL wasn't making any progress for ages before this, it had a big hype then didn't do anything, I think all the partner companies realised it wasn't working, this SCO crap just finish it all off.

    --
    --- any post that takes longer than 20 seconds to write, isn't worth writing
    1. Re:i think its quite simple by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I agree. I never quite grokked UnitedLinux. Basically everyone worth mentioning except Red Hat joined forces to combat Red Hat, but didn't do a thorough or convincing job of it. Perhaps if they had merged instead of creating a consortium, and picked a better name, it might have been taken seriously and made a good alternative to Red Hat.

      It's hard to blame SCO for the downfall of something that never made sense to begin with. SCO, in its typical scizophrenic form, thought they could make a good product by joining forces with others, rather than by improving Caldera Linux (long overdue). "Hey, we don't have to fire the lawyers and hire coders - let's just share progress with the other non-Red Hats." Yeah, right. I never took UL seriously, and now I'm glad I didn't.

    2. Re:i think its quite simple by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Mandrake didn't bother either, and look they are profitable finally, or is that again.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
  47. For those Little Rascal's fans... by tommck · · Score: 1

    The He-Man SCO Haters Club!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    1. Re:For those Little Rascal's fans... by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

      Took me like 15 seconds to figure out that "The He-Man Women Haters Club" was from Little Rascals.

      Of course I read the topic after that.

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
    2. Re:For those Little Rascal's fans... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      [Holds sword over head] "I have POWER!!" ... but no girlfriend... :(

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  48. Remember.. by msimm · · Score: 2, Informative

    Before there was the SCO Group there was Caldera/SCO and these two groups where very different.

    Jan 2000
    Jan 2001
    Jan 2002
    Jan 2003
    And of course present

    --
    Quack, quack.
  49. Lawsuits by Alizarin+Erythrosin · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

    Probably fear of being sued. You know, SCO and their new lawsuit business model. Probably would have also spun it into something about the others knowing their claims are right or something.

    --
    There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
  50. From the article... by atari2600 · · Score: 3, Informative

    SCO's Linux reversal isn't the only change, though. SuSE Linux, whose software formed the foundation for a version shared by all four companies, has been acquired by Novell. Along with that acquisition will come an endorsement from IBM, the loudest Linux advocate, in the form of a $50 million investment in Novell.

    So you see - there are other things too that matter(ed) here.
  51. Re:Will never, ever buy microsoft stuff ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't know what's worse. Your multitude of spelling errors, the countless grammatical errors, or the meandering nonsense. I personally am glad you're not purchasing any new MS software. Perhaps you should start from scratch with Microsoft Bob.

  52. Have you ever heard the words "anti-trust"? by BritGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful
    In one of the extracurricular activities associated with my real job, I represent my company on the Management Board of an open standards consortium, where many of the same questions have been discussed. There are two issues:

    1. What are the rules of the organization WRT to initiating new work? Popular choices are typically: majority vote, super-majority vote (usually 75%), n-1 (one can vote against), or unanimity. All of these models have been used by different organizations. If their model (like WSI's, I believe) opts for unanimity, then SCO could indefinitely block anything new going on.
    2. What are the rules for kicking members out? The usual provisions are for non-payment of dues only. Generally, there are no other options, as anti-trust law forbids more or less any discrimination against a company just because they are being generally obnoxious. So, if the UL board voted to kick SCO out (on any basis other than non-payment of dues), it would be a wonderful opportunity for Darl to sue someone else (both UL itself, and most likely the individual Directors), and as an anti-trust issue, conceivably the DOJ could investigate.

    Based on that, UL very likely had no choice but to shut down.

    --
    "The time is always now" - Victor
  53. haha, just kidding by kenthu · · Score: 1
    Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?
    I think you meant, "begs the question."
    1. Re:haha, just kidding by ChrisWong · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think you meant, "begs the question."

      No, begging the question is:

      Any form of argument in which the conclusion occurs as one of the premisses, or a chain of arguments in which the final conclusion is a premiss of one of the earlier arguments in the chain. (...)

      The phrase "begs the question" has come to be used to mean "raises the question" or "suggests the question" (...) This is a confusing usage which is apparently based upon a literal misreading of the phrase "begs the question". It should be avoided, and must be distinguished from its use to refer to the fallacy.

    2. Re:haha, just kidding by kenthu · · Score: 1

      (see original title)

      Guess it wasn't so funny.

  54. info by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 1

    for anyone that is not aware, this is the group that was supporting *BSD all that time.

  55. Couldn't Help It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    United Linux is dead, somebody help me out here, is that good or is it whack?

  56. everyone should read ... by jimmi_bob · · Score: 2, Interesting
    this letter linked from the article I mentioned in an earlier post. the letter is from SCO to members of congress, quoting the last paragraph:

    "we take these actions secure in the knowledge that our system of copyright laws is built on the foundation of the constitution and that our rights will be protected under law. we do so knowing that those who believe 'software should be free' cannot prevail against congress and the ruling of seven supreme court justices who believe that 'the motive of profit is the engine that ensures the progress of science.'"

    they may as well call all linux users a bunch of commie reds, recall mccarthy, and get the execution chambers ready :(
    --
    Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government." - Lenny Bruce
  57. Re:Hey, let's see if that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO is whack

  58. Goals Met. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Thier goal was to make a standard set of packages what would work seamlessly together and be user friendly. They wanted to create a set of rules to follow when adding non-official packages and work on schemes to make packages work together and not break each other be accident. There goals have never been met by any distrobution to date.

    Are you sure? That sounds like FreeBSD and its ports collection.

    1. Re:Goals Met. by shuz · · Score: 1

      BSD isn't Linux. I have sat down at a BSD box before and all the commands needed to do the important stuff seem foriegn to me. I know Linux, I love Linux. So that is what I will use and follow, support, and help develop. The only other *nix I have experience with is AIX and I feel Linux if far superior.

      --
      There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
    2. Re:Goals Met. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know a couple of IBMers who are part of the AIX development team. Not well, but well enough to exchange fairly frequent emails with. There is a small (but growing) nucleus of opinion at all levels within IBM that Linux, while not currently "there" in terms of "Big Iron" is very close to being "there" and has more potential than AIX, which has just about run out of steam.
      And I say this as an AIX administrator of many years. I have all the personality disorders to prove it, too :)

    3. Re:Goals Met. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you elaborate a little ? I'm curious to know what limitations makes AIX running out of steam. I'm not a AIX user, so I don't get how this could be.

  59. What will this do to Oracle support? by camt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oracle had a nice agreement whereby if you had any issue at all that affected the operation of your database, they would troubleshoot it to the end no matter if the cause turned out to be an OS issue; provided that you:

    1) Maintained an active Oracle support contract and
    2) Maintained an active support contract with one of the UnitedLinux vendors.

    They also have that same deal with RedHat. I was hoping to move from AIX to SuSE Enterprise Server later this year for our Oracle DB server, but now I may be forced to go with RedHat. :(

    Does anyone know how this affects the Oracle deal?

    -- Cameron

    1. Re:What will this do to Oracle support? by gregarican · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The UL consortium is what's dissolving. Not SuSE as a company. You should be fine running Oracle on their distro. I know I checked out SuSE for OpenExchange as well and am not concerned if I do pull the trigger and deploy it.

    2. Re:What will this do to Oracle support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      SuSE will continue to work with partners to certify hardware/software, just like we do now.

      - A SuSE employee

    3. Re:What will this do to Oracle support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle supported SuSE way before United Linux. Oracle will just revert back to directly supporting SuSE products themselves.

  60. SCO's REAL plan... cry wolf by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

    I think that they're going to keep doing their dumb shit until the Linux community has learned to completely ignore them. Then, one day, they're going to do something that has some real legal power behind it, and the entire Linux community is going to get blindsided.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    1. Re:SCO's REAL plan... cry wolf by necrogram · · Score: 1

      the only problem i can see with this strategy is the c word, "captial". If we make the assumtion that all these court battles is going to deplete the cash piles. so what are there options? wait a while ot build captial? sell off some of there assests? sell more "licences?" i think the true sco battle plan is either sue the shit put people becuase they are stuck with products that just dont matter anymore (comeone SCO unix ware or Linux/*BSD, you tell me?). or plan be, make such a spectical, get the stock prices up, and dump their stock fater than enron stocks.

    2. Re:SCO's REAL plan... cry wolf by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      Capital isn't that big of a problem.. They got the $50M infusion which I'm expecting to see go mostly into litigation. That'll last them a good bit of time. Even if IBM wins that suit, and counter-suit, hands down next month, SCO can still hold off payment in appeals court for a number of years.

      In the meantime, I don't see the Linux community giving Darl's legal "pronouncements" much more credence than the meaningless babbling of a harmless old fool by years' end (in fact, we're almost there already).

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    3. Re:SCO's REAL plan... cry wolf by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      SCO can only hold off payment for as long as they can afford lawyers. If SCO stock tanks (yes, I'm treating it as a hypothetical), they will probably have to face lawsuits from some of their own disgruntled shareholders as well as appealing IBM's win. 50 Million won't last six months at that rate.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    4. Re:SCO's REAL plan... cry wolf by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      If SCO stock tanks (yes, I'm treating it as a hypothetical), they will probably have to face lawsuits from some of their own disgruntled shareholders

      The only people who could sue SCO execs for the stock tanking would be the oldtime stockholders, and they'll have to wait until it drops below about $.50 to sue. The rest came in on the speculation that SCO would win their case against IBM.

      For othose who bought in at $5~$20, about the only grounds for a suit would be that Darl was greatly exagerating the stack of 'evidence' that SCO had of Linux violations. In any case, I'm not denying your suggestion.. I'm just pointing out that they'll take years to run thru and, in the middle of that, SCO could spin off a bushwacker.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  61. Re:Linux dead - hooray MS won! by deanhash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I did not know a war existed between Micro$oft and Linux! Linux will never die as long as we have dedicated programers who take pride in the code they produce and the OSDN in general. If you look at IBM and Novell's earnings as well as Mandrakesoft's you will see a Linux is far from Dead.

  62. Does it go far enough? by emil · · Score: 1

    Debian is working on a release that replaces the Linux kernel with NetBSD.

    RedHat retains nominal control over RPM, the packaging format for most commercial distributions.

    Gentoo goes forward in bringing BSD practices to Linux.

    We need a single organization, not tied to a specific distribution, to handle these issues. UnitedLinux was too commercial, the LSB too weak, but just imagine Linux and NetBSD kernels in standard configurations, with both GNU and BSD userlands, established as standards (which the BSD people would promptly ignore, but what the hey...).

    1. Re:Does it go far enough? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      This is simple to fix, and the way this can be fixed is something you should keep in mind in general because it is helpfull in many similar situations.

      If it's a true standard applicable to systems other than Linux, the BSD communities will follow it. We didn't follow the LSB because it was a standard specific. We won't follow a new LSB-with-teeth for the same reason.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    2. Re:Does it go far enough? by Nevyn · · Score: 1
      We didn't follow the LSB because it was a standard specific.

      Who is this "we" you are talking about ... in your opinion all the *BSD varients, or a specific BSD that you are involved with? If the later did you actually try and become involved with LSB to fix the points you found too specific?

      I'd also argue that something like LSB needs to be as specific/detailed as possible. SuS etc. are pretty general in places, and I'd like something that said if you want to configure your system clock go alter /etc/sysconfig/clock ... want to add a daemon call chkconfig --add. But it isn't even that specific.

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
  63. Not hot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paula isn't that hot too woo SCO's lawyers. Bigger boobs would have helped !!

  64. The Real World? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

    Sounds like an MTV Real World episode. SCO is the bad roommate that doesn't get along with anyone and is always causing trouble.

  65. What happens to all the users? by Sir+Haxa1ot · · Score: 0

    What happens to all of us who have been running UnitedLinux from version 2.4? Are they extending the support towards 2007, like other vendors?

  66. Can you hear it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [shrill trilling sound]"He's dead Jim."[/shrill trilling sound]. Followed by the blank stare over at the Captain.

  67. Wildly off topic or is it? by McNihil · · Score: 1

    Not that I want to bash Linux nor any penguins but this might be fun http://www.hate-crew.com/ordner/pinguin.swf 305.9 Slow day... hm... yup.

    1. Re:Wildly off topic or is it? by Tophorn · · Score: 1

      318.7 Here is the link in case anyone missed his typo: Play ball

  68. is anyone organizing against sco by shlomo · · Score: 0

    why not start a slashdot effort to combat sco....although they might have nothing but vapor-arguments, they seem to be winning over companies who only understnad blinky red lights.

    --
    sorry officer, left my sig in my other computer.
  69. So... by ivanmarsh · · Score: 1

    They're screwing their customers and their partners?

  70. If Alfalfa was in UnitedLinux.... by flea69 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Alfalfa: Sorry Darl-a you can't become a member of the "He-man SCO haters club".

  71. United Linux is Dying by irix · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is official; Netcraft confirms: United Linux is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered United Linux community when IDC confirmed that United Linux market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that United Linux has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. United Linux is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be Kreskin to predict United Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: United Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for United Linux because United Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for United Linux. As many of us are already aware, United Linux continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    SCO is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time SCO developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: SCO is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    SCO leader Darl states that there are 7000 users of SCO. How many users of TurboLinux are there? Let's see. The number of SCO versus TuboLinux posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 TuboLinux users. Connectiva posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of TuboLinux posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Connectiva. A recent article put SuSE at about 80 percent of the United Linux market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 SuSE users. This is consistent with the number of SuSE Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of SuSE, abysmal sales and so on, SuSE went out of business and was taken over by Novell who sell another troubled OS. Now TurboLinux is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that United Linux has steadily declined in market share. United Linux is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If United Linux is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. United Linux continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, United Linux is dead.

    Fact: United Linux is dying

    --

    Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    1. Re:United Linux is Dying by Bz3rk · · Score: 1

      SCO; "If I'm going down, I'm talking you all with meeeee!"

  72. Lock-out? by RdsArts · · Score: 1
    Debian base, broad membership rather than just 4 companies, equal partnership for all, nobody locked out.

    ... Unless you use KDE.

    1. Re:Lock-out? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful
      apt-get install kde

      It'll work, I promise. And there will be people who want to support you.

      Bruce

    2. Re:Lock-out? by RdsArts · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering your trying to make a 'standard' that has GNOME as it's only GUI, for how long would that hold true?

      I'm not saying this as some KDE zealot. Truth be told, I've not installed the desktop in at least a year. My enviroment of choice is ROX. There isn't a distro alive that includes it as default. (Yet ;) ) But your group isn't open to everyone. Only GNOME distros and users. How can you possibly view that as not locking out a large segment of the user base? Expectally outside the US?

      I'm not saying I don't see why you do it, and I'm not saying you don't have a right to do it, but you have to call a spade a spade. KDE users are locked out.

    3. Re:Lock-out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I understand, KDE users aren't locked out, just that they'll have to add an apt repository to enjoy their prefered desktop setup. "locked up" would mean that UserLinux architects would have done everything they could to stop KDE to be installed.
      Frankly, you must admit There's a limit to what you can stuff inside a CD. I really like the KDE desktop myself, but I understand the choice that has been made.

      Or are you ready to fight for all other desktop environments out there to be included in UserLinux ?

    4. Re:Lock-out? by RdsArts · · Score: 1

      Frankly, you must admit There's a limit to what you can stuff inside a CD. I really like the KDE desktop myself, but I understand the choice that has been made.

      This isn't about if he has the right or not. It's about him claiming it's open, when it is not. This is a reference distro, not RedHat or anything. Their choices are done to make a de facto standard, and exclusion from this makes something 'non-standard.' So for the most popular desktop in the Free software world to be excluded from a 'standard' is not keeping it open, and is locking them out.

      Or are you ready to fight for all other desktop environments out there to be included in UserLinux ?

      In a reference distro that's meant to be a 'standard' for others to make their distributions against?

      You'd better believe I would.

    5. Re:Lock-out? by Mr.+Hankey · · Score: 1

      I'll hold you to that, for my part I won't let a Linux distro that doesn't have KDE touch my desktop/laptop anymore. I for one will admit to being a KDE zealot, Political Correctness be damned. I simply like it better. :-)

      --
      GPL: Free as in will
  73. Re: NOT SEEN ON /. YESTERDAY. by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    It was NOT seen on slashdot yesterday -- by the moderators.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  74. Ancient and Mystic.... (ob simpson gag) by purrpurrpussy · · Score: 0

    I now call to order the first meeting of the ancient mystic society of... No SCO United..... ;-)

    --
    "None of this shit works" -W.Shatner
  75. Really nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice plug. Couldn't wait until the body at least got cold before you pounced on the opportunity. You'd probably steal pennies holding down the cadaver's lids as well I'd bet.

  76. A fire from the ash shall be waken! by wilddur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's be positive. We needed a stronger Linux suport group than United Linux

    We need a group that promote linux compatible drivers. We need hardware with a "Works with Linux" Tag. We need someone to protect goberment from de FUD, and someone who can promote some kind of open and voluntary standars so that All distributions become closer and closer.

    So there must be an agrupation of more Linux vendors, distributions and even firms who have interest in the field of Linux. Not only RedHAT or SUSE but also, IBM, ORACLE, etc... And of course, not only firms: Debian must be represented, etc etc... It will have some kind of strength wouldn't it?

    And, last but not least, it should be made so that even if SCO or M$ were members it could continue existing with some annoying visitors in the mettings.

    Let's hope it is a beggining forempowement of linux users
    ---
    A fire from the ash shall be woken
    A ligth from the shadow shall spring
    Reforged be the blade that was broken
    The Crownless again shall be king ( LOTR )

    1. Re:A fire from the ash shall be waken! by bstadil · · Score: 1
      We needed a stronger Linux suport group than United Linux

      Personally I need a 12 step program just to weane me off Groklaw.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
  77. SuSE was the only significant contributor anyway.. by Junta · · Score: 1

    Novell knows SuSE can fly on its own, any excuse to get them out of helping other somewhat unsucessful linux companies is good news to them. I know, Turbo and Conectiva have enjoyed moderate success in Asia and South America, but in the global scheme of things, they didn't have much of a market share.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  78. Questions about User Linux by WankersRevenge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey Bruce,

    So here's my question - okay - correct me if I'm wrong here - so we have the whole issue of KDE not being put into User Linux because KDE is not as commercial friendly as GTK. You can release a program under GTK and not open the source. People seem to rally behind that principle.

    Yet, whenever some important software project is ported or achieved, people scream for the source. I'm not asking whether your choice to exclude KDE is right or wrong - rather, aren't the reasons behind GTK going against the spirit of the community in general? Businesses might release closed code under GTK, but they will be assailed from the community to open it. Do you think this will be beneficial to either the business in question or community? To me, it seems bound for conflict.

    Another question - why did you choose the name User Linux when the target audience is clearly for business users. I was initially irked that KDE wasn't included but when I read your underlying principles for the distribution, I see your point. The cause of conflict - for me - was the use of the word "user". When I think User Linux - I think Joe Six Pack Linux. I think a lot people get confused with that as well.

    In either case, Linux evangelism - whether it be KDE focused or GNOME focused is good for everyone. Now if only we can create a decent installer for the desktop without use of the command line or compiler then I'd kiss windows goodbye for good.

  79. Didn't See that coming? by rayamor · · Score: 0

    Come on, like we all didn't see this coming!

  80. SCO was the reason I never tried UL by superpulpsicle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I came real close to installing united linux when redhat discontinued their regular non-AS line. Then I found out SCO was part of united linux, I went with some other distro instead.

  81. Re: United Linux is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no spoon.

  82. This is great news! by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it sucks United Linux is gone, but after this crap, absoulutely no one will have anything to do with SCO as a business. Yeah, us Linux geeks have already given up on SCO, but there were probably plenty of non-technical people that might have blown the whole thing off and went on doing business with them. You can't screw your partners over like this and ever have anything to do with the industry again.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  83. YOU FUCKING FAIL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No hyperlinks, no bold or italic characters. You little piece of shit. If you're going to rip that troll off, at least get the formatting right.

  84. Growing Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux cannot at this point compete in terms of feature and performance with most other operating systems *currently available (*note: of course it's lightyears ahead of the Hurd).

    However, it may still attract plenty of attention and publicity by strategically displaying booth babes and mascots as their more modern competitors commonly do, such as BSD and Multics. For example, Linux Asia could use this appropriate mascot more often and hopefully they won't go the way of UnitedLinux.

  85. Glad THAT'S over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The idea that SCO killed UnitedLinux is about as valid a statement as the idea that it really was a cooperative group. That, too, is about as valid a statement as the idea that UL was more than SuSE's half-finished linux-like product kicked over the fence to an unsuspecting and powerless clientele, whose only choice was to beat it into something they could now sell.

    UL was a bad idea from the start, because one of those companies just doesn't play well with others. We all gave up trying, a long time ago, really, because of the arrogance. UL were just looking for an excuse to break up the whole thing, because it was a pointless exercise from the start.

    Thankfully, Conectiva still has their own linux product, still maintained and untainted by these baroque four-year-old kludges. When RH9 is forgotten, I'll definitely be giving Conectiva a good, hard look. They seem to like technology they didn't invent themselves, seem to work very well with other companies, and really have a deent product .. the best product that no one's ever seen.

    And they moved beyond RPM v3 sometime in 2000.

    If my own experience with the UL bunch gives me nothing more, at least I will have learne denough about Conectiva to know they're a really grat company, and I'll be thankful for the painfully bad project that is UL for at least the opportunity to learn about Conectiva I would never otherwise have had.

    (No, I'm not signing my name. Litigious bastards)

  86. good. by micq · · Score: 0, Troll

    How many linux distro's do we need anyways? I mean, are we gaining anything when 3 linux distro makers join together to make another one while still working on their own?

    They should all be joining together in a RIP ROARING CAGE MATCH and battle it out until one penguin is left standing, holding his bill, ready to smackdown anyone who tries to stand up. Rough em up a little, put some foot up their ass... prove penguins can fly.

    And after debians done kicking the other distro's asses, we shall unite behind our new leader and go stomp the shit out of that buttplugger Daryl.

    YEAH!

  87. Never give up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You hear me, United Linux? Never!!!

  88. Re: United Linux is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SPOON!!!!

  89. Simpsons parallel by UnknowingFool · · Score: 0, Redundant
    This reminds me of that Simpson's episode:

    Number One: We might as well face the truth: as long as we're Stonecutters, he will control our lives.
    Moe: Maybe...but _maybe_ we don't want to be Stonecutters no more.
    [a crane removes a "Baskin Robbins" sign and replaces it with "Abandoned Store"]
    Number One:Silence! I now call to order the first meeting of the ancient mystic society of...No Homers.

    Can't they start a United No-SCOnix organization?

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  90. whoa! by jonnystiph · · Score: 3, Funny

    Way tooooo much D&D, I saw that as the United Linux Undead. Although slightly interested, I don't think I would qualify, not yet at least....

    --

    If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank

    1. Re:whoa! by sgtron · · Score: 1

      maybe you were thinking of this

      --
      No todo lo que es oro brilla
  91. Linux is Dying!! by bsd_usr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This is proof that Linux is dying!

  92. outstretched hand to latin america and africa by zpok · · Score: 2

    OK, this is a great opportunity for other linux groups to offer support and immigration options to latin american and african users.

    Go forth and multiply :-)

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  93. Re:Nice website! by Carewolf · · Score: 1

    apt-get kick wimp?

  94. UL may be dead... by slasher999 · · Score: 1

    ...but we are still seeing huge maturity-type changes in Linux, kind of what we probably would have seen through UL anyhow. RedHat has positioned themselves as an enterprise only company and SuSE is now held by one of the networking giants of old (Novell that is) and will probably be more palatable to large companies because of this. I'm pretty certain that these are going to be the only two real players in the enterprise Linux market, at least in the US, in coming years.

  95. SCO is doomed ! hehe by SsueCmeOplease · · Score: 1

    "...why would SCO join an organization designed to standardize the way in which their IP rights are violated?"

    all part of Darl's evil plan. But, now his plan has been foiled. And, no one in their right mind will now enter into an agreement with the king of litigeous bastard's. No one can trust that their future agreements with SCO can be SCO-proofed from litigation. Because, no one knows what wild claims Darl will come up with next time.

  96. Really? by yoriknme · · Score: 1

    I'd have thought everyone else's credibility just went up about 10 points after disconnecting from SCO.

  97. Almost there! by metamatic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now, if we can only kill off the LSB, we stand a chance of getting rid of RPM. Mmm... an "RPM dead" headline on Slashdot, wouldn't that be a lovely thing to see?

    (No, I'm not trolling, I'm serious.)

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    1. Re:Almost there! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      No one is forcing you to use RPM.

    2. Re:Almost there! by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Uh, ever tried maintaining a UnitedLinux system without RPM?

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  98. Actually, it was IBM that killed UL by Opusthepenguin · · Score: 2, Informative

    While it's definately SCO's fault that UL as it originally was conceived failed, it was IBM's insistance that SuSE not leave UL and reform with the other two UL companies that put the final kybosh on the whole idea.

  99. Answers about User Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not BP, but I hope I can respond to this. The reason for not including KDE isn't that its license terms are bad, but rather that UserLinux _has_ to pick _just_one_ and GTK's terms, for businesses, are better. The idea here is to create a simple-to-admin distro for businesses; it can't include two competing desktops (or webservers, or scripting languages, etc). So one had to be picked, and BP picked the one that had the fewest licensing issues.

    As far as goes the name, I sort of agree. But the idea really is to be Joe Sixpack Linux; it's just for Joe Sixpack while he's at work.

    wrt the installer, have you checked out Fedora? Anaconda is a great installer, and debian-installer ain't bad either.

  100. Untied Linux? by Buskaatt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe that would be a better name for the new group.

    (tip of the hat to Gary Larson)

  101. Square pegs....Round Holes by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux is not comfortable being sold or consolidated....Let it run free and remain free.

    Anyone that has tried to make money selling or sueing Linux has fallen victim to the geek equivelent of being on the cover of SI. A fast and painful death to all who try to pen her in or shut her down.

    Due yourself a favor and dont sell out to "the man". Install Debian or Slackware and come back to reality.

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  102. Or this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux Reloaded

  103. SCO says "Linux hurts US" by ashitaka · · Score: 1

    "ohhh yesss, it hurtss usss!"

    "IT BURNSSS USSS!!!"

    "My preciouss Linuxxess."

    "Bad, bad Perenesess."

    I'll stop now.

    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
  104. And Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux Revolutions

  105. Since we're on the subject of UserLinux (OT)... by TrentC · · Score: 1

    ...is UserLinux just a pared-down version of Debian (with changes rolled back into Debian proper) or will there be incompatibilities arising from "slight" differences?

    You say, for example, that "apt-get install kde" should satisfy those who want to use KDE on UserLinux's release, but is a goal for all Debian-configured software?

    Jay (=

  106. Kicking SCO out by TekPolitik · · Score: 3, Insightful
    couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?

    Ironically, no. SCO have a proprietary interest in the group, and so cannot be kicked out unless the group has a constitution that provides for this. It doesn't really matter that SCO are doing their best to destroy the value of that interest.

    On the other hand, there was nothing to stop them all quitting and starting a new organisation with the same goals.

  107. No great loss really. by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, the entire idea of UL was shaky, and shady..

    We are better off with out it.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  108. Re:Linux dead - hooray MS won! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that the best you can do in four months ?

  109. Re:Don't forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, this guy had his ten minutes, but is obviously a one-trick pony. Pretty sad, actually, not knowing when to hang it up and revel in one's achievement, rather than go on and on pathetically.

  110. Tux does NOT dress like a bitch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once again, I have to protest that idiotic icon of Tux wearing a suit.

    Suits may USE Linux, but Tux would never wear a suit. I mean, for chrissakes, he's already formally dressed without needing to dress him like a cocksucker.

    Obviously, someone at /. thought the "Tux dressed like a bitch" icon was cute, but that only demonstrates their latent homosexuality. I, in fact, know who okayed it, but out of respect, I'll only say his initials: Rob Malda.

  111. UnitedLinux is dead, long live SLES by pix · · Score: 1

    As far as I was aware, UL was effectively SUSE Linux Enterprise Server made available to the other members of UL. UL might be dead, but SLES most certainly isn't - it's very alive and happily winning lots of business. So all those of you who were desperate for UnitedLinux, go install SLES and be happy.

  112. what linux "needs" are the users. by evil_one666 · · Score: 1
    The whole point of linux is that development decisions arent made by corporations, and the wisdom of this ideal is underlined by the demise of the fratrecidal corporate entity known (ironically) as "United Linux"

    The only group of people who should decide what linux "needs" are the users. Linux development cannot be hijacked by commercial interests.

    The most interesting aspect of the demise of UL is what it actually means to we, the linux using public. And what it actually means is not very much at all. Life under the penguin goes on and continues to improve whether these self appointed commercial consortiums exist or not.

  113. Quick! by Tokerat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Figure that whatever SCO touches will be dead without further notice.
    Push Microsoft at them, quick!
    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  114. Dead? Whadaya mean, DEAD?! by ader · · Score: 1

    UnitedLinux is DEAD??? It can't be! I run my entire enterprise on that OS! Oh man, this is worse than the Solaris 2.0 EOL announcement!! Or the Betamax thing! ...Thank ghod my Red Hat 9 boxes are OK.

    Ade_
    /

    --
    Big Bubbles (no troubles) - what sucks, who sucks and you suck