Slashdot Mirror
An Open Letter from Darl McBride
canfirman writes "Well, it seems Darl is changing tactics as he's now published an open letter proclaiming the benefits of UNIX over any other operating system. However, most of his letter involves comparing SCO Unix to Linux from not only a business acceptance point of view, but from a technical point of view, too. Darl throws in a bunch of stats in there, too: 'In a study
conducted only seven months ago they found that overall, the most
vulnerable operating system for manual hacker attacks was Linux,
accounting for 65.64% of all hacker breaches reported.' I'd love for somebody who has more technical knowledge than me to look at his points and see if what he says is true or not -- assuming anything coming out of Darl's mouth is true."
I can believe part of his claims in that more Linux systems get hacked, compared to commercial Unices. Though I don't think this is a general problem with security on Linux, but with the fact that most home installations of Unix based systems will be on Linux boxes - and therefore in the hands of people with less security expertise than large companies have at their disposal.
...but outside of that most security fixes will probably come in when it's time to update the system as a whole...
Also, companies have dedicated sysadmins or even IT security people which will (hopefully) constantly check for new vulnerabilities and immediately patch their systems.
Private "Home" Unix installations that aren't Linux based will in comparison be more likely to be in the hands of the more knowledgable folks, and hence also in the hands of people that will likely be more security aware than the average home Windows/Mac/Linux user.
How many private users with their linux box on broadband seriously do that (except for those that hold IT security / admin type positions)?
I'm a developer - and I'm not in the habit of daily (or even weekly) patching of systems. I'm occasionally checking the system and I do react (i.e. patch) when I hear about some (widely publicised) security hole...
Another factor in "less" security of systems in people's homes, is that most people just stay ignorant of the situation, because they think "my box doesn't contain anything important that would make it worth hacking"; but they're often with that ignoring the danger that someone might just break into their computer just to use the computer in further attacks on more "rewarding" targets.
In the late 1970's Microsoft licensed UNIX source code from AT&T which at the time was not licensing the name UNIX. Therefore Microsoft created the name Xenix. Microsoft did not sell Xenix to end-users but instead licensed the software to software OEMs such as Intel, Tandy, Altos and SCO who then provided a finished version of their own Xenix to the end-users or other customers. SCO introduced its first version of Xenix named SCO Xenix System V for the Intel 8086 and 8088 in 1983. Today SCO Xenix is one of the more commonly used and found versions of Xenix.
Linux was based on Minix. A UnixLite OS designed to run on PCs. However, it was really only a teaching tool. Andrew Tanenbaum repeatedly refused to add the new (legitimate) features the users and even developers asked for. Linus Torvalds set out simply to add functionality to his own version of Minix (the copyright allows use to do so for your own personal use, but you cannot sell or distibute it).
Over time, in adding functionality to Minix, Linus Torvalds found that he had created an entirely new kernel. I was very similar to Minix but used none of the Minix source code. Torvalds had originally called it freax, for "`free' + `freak' + the obligatory `-x'. The operator of the FTP server where Linus' new kernel made its debut didn't like the name and simply called it Linux (Linus + Unix). People seemed to like the name so it stuck.
Nope, linux is still free, regardless of how you value your time.
My time is highly valuable to me, and I charge my clients for it. My clients love Linux because it "just works". Email server with uptimes of over a year or more, file servers that boot right up, no problem, after a power failure and the UPS is drained. Backups, networking, routing, firewalling, it all just works. No blue screens, no registraions, no licensing issues, no hassles, easy software patches, and best of all CHOICES of vendors.
Sure there are problems with various distos of linux. With any complex software there will be issues. But on the whole, Linux runs circles around windows in terms of the lack of headaches and reliability.
Yes indedy. If you're on a commercial OS, you can use your valuable time waiting for return calls from the vendor's "help desk", learning to understand what passes for English in whatever fungal third-world nation the "help desk" is in this week, and writing long and desperate correspondence to various level of your management explaining why you haven't solved the problem yet.
Thanks, no thanks, I'd just as soon be able to examine the kernel source myself. And I speak as a professional admin of two different closed-source unixes at a military technical facility. It's all fun and games until someone puts a production server out.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
I only read the beginning part of his open letter and couldn't continue because it was so full of unsupported claims. It kind of reminds me of the beloved Iraq Information Officer Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, who in the last days of Sadam's regime said things like:
"They are lying every day. They are lying always, and mainly they are lying to their public opinion."
"They are achieving nothing; they are suffering from casualties. Those casualties are increasing, not decreasing."
"We are determined to defeat them and destroy them on the walls of our capital, as we are determined to destroy their miserable armies in every Muslim spot."
This makes me wonder, is Darl playing the same role of the beloved Iraq Information Officer, announcing the death of SCO in a humorous way?
"But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system...."
Quoth the wikipedia:
The present owner of the UNIX trademark is The Open Group, while the present claimants on the rights to the UNIX source code are The SCO Group and Novell. Only systems fully compliant with and certified to the Single UNIX Specification qualify as "UNIX" (others are called "UNIX system-like" or Unix-like).
Novell also has source code rights. Also, Darl, you should be careful to use the UNIX trademark so freely as it is clearly a registered trademark of the Open Group. From their website.
"Customers can identify UNIX certified products by the Open Brand logo and the mandatory attribution declaring to which version of the specification the product complies:"
So no Darl, you do not own UNIX. Get a clue.
"The competitive battle between Pepsi and Coke is legendary, as is the battle between GM and Ford, Boeing and Airbus, and the Red Sox and Yankees."
Your analogy between Pepsi and Coke (where did you learn to write anyways? 4th grade?) is so inherently flawed that the term "apples to oranges" doesn't even begin to describe how distorted this viewpoint is, as both are still fruit. My guess is that you were trying to provide some humour. I certainly got a good laugh.
" 1. OpenServer 6 Costs Less - OpenServer 6 offers very aggressive pricing.
The purchase price for SCO OpenServer 6 is priced from $599 to $1399
which includes the license to the product, software fixes, and access
to SCO's online knowledge base. Customers pay once for the product
and run it for as long as they like."
I don't really know what kind of math you are using Darl, because in my world, $599 is a whole lot more than $0. Also, I don't really see how asking for a support contract is a "bait and switch" tactic as you claim. If you don't need support, there are more than enough FREE, as in beer and speech, alternatives out there in the Linux universe.
" "Free" is one of the most searched words on the Web today. When you
type in "Free" in Yahoo search, it brings up more than 3 billion hits.
"Free" is a very powerful marketing concept. We all love free. Linux
lures you in with the promise of its being "free." But before you get
out of the "store," you are surprised to find out that it was anything
but free. Just remember the proverb, 'Free is the most expensive
price.'"
Darl. All I gotta ask is, can I have some of what you are smoking. It has GOTTA be good!
"OpenServer 6's features form a very powerful server."
Yeah. Especially now that you included a bunch of, get this, FREE software. How much did apache cost you? How much did you spend on developing the open source tools that you now use? Are we, as a collective, supposed to just swallow this pill, that you attack free, open source software, and then include it in your own operating system. If that is not sheer hypocricy that I have no idea what is. Go to hell Darl. We all know what UNIX is and was and it surely is not SCO anymore, or probably ever was for what it matters. Personally I hope your lawyers bleed what little liquidity you have left, if they are smart that is. You are a joke. Nobody respects your company anymore. I hope that you go to bed everynight worrying that your illegal insider trading activities may one day land you in court. Crooks like you, and the ones that fund your pitiful crusade, deserve to sit in a 4'x4' cell with your new wife, Bubba.
Have a wonderful day!
Sincerely,
Zos/Xavius.23
zosxavius photography
A few things that bother me: 1. Novell didn't come out MUCH earlier to claim their 95% of royalties
If you read Novell's filing, you will see that they have, in fact, been doing this for the past two years. As litigation and public aggrandizement weren't their goals, they've been doing it privately (ie., the way business professionals work.) It's only when they're sure that they have 100% legal proof that SCOX wouldn't hold up their end of the contract that they brought it to court.
2. Darl et al probably will not see any jail time
Don't count this out yet - it could still happen (wait for SCO to go bankrupt first.)
3. who put SCOX up to this? And I mean proof of who's pulling the strings, not the "it just has to be MSFT" speculation, though I agree with that speculation.
Without a whistleblower, anything right now will be speculation.
For the record, I don't think anyone put them up to it - I think that MS (and possibly Sun) may have seized the opportunity to fund some anti-Linux FUD, but it started out as Darl's get-rich-quick scheme to get IBM to buy SCO. IBM called, and SCO was forced to launch the suits to maintain face.
That's funny. I just saved a ton of money on my motorcycle insurance by switching away from Geico.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score