Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

United Linux Dead

Posted by michael on from the no-business-like-sco-business dept.

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?"

6 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. 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.
    --
    The Army reading list
  2. 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!
  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.

    --
    What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
  4. 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
  5. 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.

    --
    Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
  6. 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...