Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SCO Identifies EV1Servers as Linux Licensee

Posted by simoniker on from the importance-of-being-licensed dept.

jasonhamilton writes "EV1Servers.net has been identified as a Linux licensee, giving them the dubious title of being the first dedicated hosting company to have a licence agreement with SCO. Rather than 'eliminating uncertainty from our clients' hosting infrastructure', as Robert Marsh (CEO of EV1Servers) claims, some users of EV1 appear to be somewhat upset."

10 of 740 comments (clear)

  1. EV1Servers.net was known as Rackshack.net by RocketJeff · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yes, for all those people wondering, EV1Servers.net used to be known as Rackshack.net.

    goto Rackshack.net and you'll get the 'official' word (and a redirect to EV1Servers.net)

    For some reason there seems to be a lot of confusion about this.

  2. Re:I was about to rent.... by athakur999 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was thinking about EV1Servers but went with Server Matrix instead. The prices are comparable and they give you more bandwidth.

    --
    "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
  3. Netcraft sez... by phil+reed · · Score: 5, Informative

    The site www.ev1servers.net is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

    The site forums.ev1servers.net is running Apache/1.3.28 (Unix) mod_gzip/1.3.26.1a PHP/4.3.2 on Linux.

    --

    ...phil
    "For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
  4. Ummm, slight correction.... by inode_buddha · · Score: 5, Informative
    EV1 has stated that they are using RHEL and BSD if you check out this post at groklaw:

    OT: Robert Marsh (CEO of E1servers.net) interview Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:08 PM EST

    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/02/03/inter view_ev1servers_ceo_robert_mar sh.html

    Q. You recently made a long-term commitment to Red Hat Enterprise as EV1Servers' standard Linux OS going forward, and have also begun offering FreeBSD. What factors guided your decisions on the "OS road map" for EV1Servers for 2004 and beyond?
    A.Our number one consideration was long-term stability. For the majority of our users, web servers are business tools, not unlike phone systems or copy machines. They expect the equipment to work smoothly, and have no interest in devoting significant time and attention to frequent updates. We felt that RHE's 12-18 month release cycle and 5-year support timeframe would best meet their needs.
    We also took into account our customers' feedback. While most were strongly supportive of our selection of RHE, we also received a significant number of requests for FreeBSD as an alternative. And that's what we now offer.

    --
    C|N>K
  5. Re:Their other accolade: by cduffy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Couldn't they take SCO to the cleaners if/when SCO loses and this "license" is proven not to be a requirement?

    The text of the contract says pretty clearly that you don't have much recourse if/when it turns out to be worthless.

    Being Not A Lawyer, I can't really comment on how enforceable this clause is.

  6. Re:You want me to Refresh? by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Informative

    The hosting company didn't get Slashdotted. The main website is up and it's just the one-server fourm that went down. (vBulletin can only get you so far...) I can ping my server that I have there just like nothing's going on.

  7. Re:They are NOT on "our" side... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Informative

    Microsoft claims here that they considered Linux, but came back to Microsoft products in the end.

    That's a bad summary of the article. EV1 has a great high-volume system for selling Linux dedicated servers in real time. They knew from their own web boards that some people wanted a hosting place as good as EV1 for Windows servers, but EV1 stalled forever because it just wasn't that easy to work with Windows.

    Microsoft came in and gave them a great deal of support in setting up their existing order system to work with deploying Windows servers. They didn't throw any Linux servers out, and in fact they're still setting more up... they just were able to add Windows servers to their product lines and were actually able to make it work. Nobody's been able to match their $89/mo. price point on a true dedicated server that runs Windows yet.

    EV1's the best in the business. They're not zealots towards any particular OS... they just have a reputation of keeping a large datacenter humming, and now they're about to have two.

  8. Other pickers after IBM by isn't+my+name · · Score: 5, Informative

    but in reality I doubt there will be any meat left on them bones by the time IBM is done with them.

    Don't forget that SCO has a PIPE deal with BayStar Capital and the Royal Bank of Canada that gives them priority over most claimants in any liquidation deal. Plus, The Canopy Group has a promissory note to SCO which also gives them priority.

    So, I don't really know what kind of priority a court judgement gets in a bankrupcy, but I'd almost bet that IBM is third in line after BS/RBC and then Canopy. Even if they end up before them, there will certainly be nothing left for the licensees or the common shareholders.

  9. dedicated server price points by nday91 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many other providers sell true dedicated with many OS at that price point (or better).

    Start with www.servermatrix.com. RHES, Redhat 9, FreeBSD, and, yes, Windows.

    And "best in business" is an opinion not shared by many. Go to www.webhostingtalk.com to see comparisons.

  10. Re:No kidding... by Wyzard · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes, Windows (XP and 2003, possibly 2000 as well) can be installed via PXE using Remote Installation Services. Microsoft even provides a PXE boot floppy for use with systems that don't provide it in the BIOS.

    RIS requires a specially-configured NTFS partition (you can't put things other than installation images on it), and uses hard-linking to save space on duplicate files between similar installation images.

    Of course, this doesn't address the question of why they don't image the Linux systems. It's certainly not very hard to do.