Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SCO Offers Up The 'SCAMP' Stack

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the quite-the-little-scamps dept.

Robert wrote to mention a Computer Business Review Online article about SCO's newest marketing tactic. They're offering their OS as part of a 'SCAMP' stack, ala the more familiar LAMP setup. From the article: "The Lindon, Utah-based Unix vendor has included the open source Apache web server, MySQL database, and PHP and Perl programming languages with its SCO OpenServer operating system since the launch of OpenServer 6 in June 2005. It is now pitching the technologies as a SCAMP stack, placing it squarely up against the Linux-based LAMP stack. SCO claims that Linux contains Unix code donated to the open source operating system in violation of agreements between it and IBM Corp."

24 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Great name choice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    scamp (skmp)

    n.

    1. A rogue; a rascal.
    2. A mischievous youngster.

    tr.v

    • To perform in a careless superficial way.
    1. Re:Great name choice! by Zemplar · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just prefer the first "SCAM" definition name for short.

  2. rascal? by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 2

    In Ireland, a "scamp" is like a rascal. Like when a child does something and almost gets away with it, and no one's made, they'd be called a little scamp.

    Is it not so in other countries or are SCO just the stupidest company ever to last this long?

    --
    Please help publicise swpat.org - the software patents wiki
    1. Re:rascal? by Jerf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Presumably due to heavy Irish immigration during the Potato famine, that word is definitely in the US vocabulary, too. I have no idea what crack they were smoking for that name, because there's just no way nobody involved knew what it meant.

      I honestly said out loud when I saw this story on the frontpage, "Is this a joke?"

      Incidentally, a lot of words survive in English primarily as part of a phrase, with their older, original meanings lost. In a way, the phrase is the word. For example, "hither and yon"; neither word is in common or even uncommon use anymore on its own, but the phrase is still used uncommonly. While "scamp" has not descended to this level, there is a phrase associated with it in my mind that may outlast the word itself: 'a scamp and a scoundrel' (and note we don't much use "scoundrel" anymore either), as in "he's a scamp and a scoundrel".

      So again, what crack were these people smoking? I mean, I know we like to bag on marketters around here, but there is a certain level of skill involved...

  3. Not safe to use by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It isn't safe to use SCAMP. SCO's corporate future is uncertain. They've based their entire company around a lawsuit that it looks like they will probably lose. It would be a bad idea to use SCAMP for a production system only to have SCO go bankrupt a year or two later.

    Sure, you could convert your SCAMP-based application to LAMP if that happens, but doing that on a production system is very costly due to all the manpower to switch platforms and all the testing to make sure everything works.

    You should ask yourself, what advantages does SCAMP offer over LAMP that warrants the risk of using a platform from a dying company? Are there even any such advantages at all?

    1. Re:Not safe to use by dougmc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It would be a bad idea to use SCAMP for a production system only to have SCO go bankrupt a year or two later.
      I wouldn't say that.

      SCAMP is short on details, but it sounds like it's exactly the same tools as in LAMP ... but in SCO. Except that you could just drop your application back into Linux, and it would just work there too. You could also move it to FreeBSD, Solaris, OpenBSD ... probably even Windows (most of the LAMP stuff runs under cygwin at least, and there's probably native Windows versions of most of it) and it would even work there with minimal work.

      I don't see much danger here. (Of course, I don't see much benefit in going with SCO in the first place, and so I certainly wouldn't do so.)

      As far as I can tell, it's just a marketing ploy. `Look! We can do the same thing as Linux, but we have a cuter name for it! So use us!'. There's little danger, as your application would probably port right back to a LAMP system with little effort, but there's no benefit either, because a LAMP system would work just as well from the beginning.

    2. Re:Not safe to use by jaseuk · · Score: 3, Informative

      XAMPP and other similar projects make it really easy to install all that stuff under windows. It's easier in some respects to install XAMPP under windows than it is for Linux, particulary for someone with out any Linux experience.

      "The distribution for Windows 98, NT, 2000 and XP. This version contains: Apache, MySQL, PHP + PEAR, Perl, mod_php, mod_perl, mod_ssl, OpenSSL, phpMyAdmin, Webalizer, Mercury Mail Transport System for Win32 and NetWare Systems v3.32, JpGraph, FileZilla FTP Server, mcrypt, eAccelerator, SQLite, and WEB-DAV + mod_auth_mysql. "

      Jason

    3. Re:Not safe to use by Kaenneth · · Score: 3, Funny

      It isn't safe to use LAMP. GNU's fiscal future is certain. They've based their entire organization around giving software away for free. It would be a bad idea to use LAMP for a production system only to have the developers get 'real jobs'.

      Sure, you could convert your LAMP-based application to SCAMP if that happens, but doing that on a production system is very costly due to all the manpower to document the old system and all the conversions from unsupported formats.

      You should ask yourself, what advantages does LAMP offer over SCAMP that warrants the risk of using a platform from a bunch of communist hippies? Are there even any such advantages at all?

  4. Re:Tetris Installer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ubuntu tetris installer would also record the highscores to log files, as plain text ofcourse :)

  5. wink-and-nod by zero+time+ghost · · Score: 5, Funny

    Somewhere in the dank basement levels far below Darl McBride's office, SCO's only remaining systems engineer is laughing wildly. They actually went with "SCAMP"! The fools!

  6. Pay more for less! by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Informative

    LAMP isn't so much a literal acronym as much as is stands for the concept of all the components being open source. I doubt many people would stop calling it LAMP if it included FreeBSD instead of Linux, nor would replacing MySQL with ProgreSQL suddenly turn it into something completely different. Hell, the P can mean PHP, Perl or Python, and I think even Ruby would count as a LAMP language.

    So how this SCAMP thing is supposed to be anything special, is completely beyond my comprehention.

    However, I for one would be VERY curious as to how SCO is treating all the different FOSS licenses which apply. As far as I know, Apache's license has a mutual patent annihilation clause, and I'm pretty sure the other licenses have their own set of rules too. It would be all too funny if one of them found a reason to sue SCO over their prepackaged SCAMP solution.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Pay more for less! by shish · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I doubt many people would stop calling it LAMP if it included FreeBSD instead of Linux

      I've seen "FLPR" (FreeBSD / LigHTTPd / Postgres / Ruby (on Rails)) gaining popularity...

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
  7. Re:Blah, blah, blah by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have they become so lawsuit happy that they've forgotten how to compete?

    Yes, actually. As soon as Caldera took over the SCO Unix business, they pretty much dropped any real support for the platform and focused their efforts on sueing Linux. If the reports are to be believed, their distributors were about ready to hang them during the various regional meetings. The SCO corporate reps came across as somewhat anxious about all the bad will towards them, but definitely not apologetic.

    The fallout of these meetings was expected to be that SCO would lose a lot of their local distributors. The results of which would be catastrophic if SCO were actually trying to do business. Now that they realize that their lawsuit has failed, they've found that they've screwed themselves on being able to do business. In addition, they've burned their OSS bridge (guess we won't be seeing an opensco.org, eh?), leaving them with no real edge in the market. So now they're trying to convince businesses that they can provide OSS support without being an OSS supporter.

    My prediction? You're going to be seeing quite a few new Solaris 10/OpenSolaris installations very soon now.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  8. SCAMP : Dogfood or Dogshit? by NZheretic · · Score: 3, Informative
    Darl can't even eat his own dogfood ...
    http://www.sco.com was running Apache on Linux when last queried at 9-Mar-2006 20:57:45 GMT
    Worse still ...
    http://www.edgeclickpark.com was running Apache on Windows 2000 when last queried at 14-Mar-2006 14:43:14 GMT

    Microsoft Windows 2000 Server with all vendor patches installed and all vendor workarounds applied, is currently affected by 21 Secunia advisories some of which are rated Highly critical.

  9. What? by tengennewseditor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Who is running this stupid company?

  10. Re:Tetris Installer! by realnowhereman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I heard that the reason nobody does this is that some evil corp has a patent on mini-games during installers.

    I'm not really sure how, I remember playing pac man on my sinclair once while a game was loading from tape, which would surely be prior art.

    --
    Carpe Daemon
  11. Tcl by Snap+E+Tom · · Score: 4, Funny


    And if they replace the PHP package with Tcl, they can call it SCAT.

    1. Re:Tcl by gbobeck · · Score: 4, Funny

      And if SCO moves to Houston and they replace Apache with IIS, it would then be called SHIT. Oh wait, all SCO products (and SCO, too) already are.

      --
      Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
  12. claim? by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2, Funny
    SCO claims that Linux contains Unix code donated to the open source operating system in violation of agreements between it and IBM Corp."

    Wow! That's big news if it's true. Why haven't we heard more about this?

  13. What really caught my eye here: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While OpenServer 6 was launched in two versions, with the Starter Edition for two users costing $599, and the Enterprise Edition for 10 users costing $1,399, the SCAMP stack is licensed for five users and is available for $999 until July 31.

    Now wait, I'd be curious about this. It sounds to me like "SCAMP" is basically four free programs packaged together. Every single one of those four programs is under a different open source license, and the strictest of those licenses-- the GPL-- SCO is probably not bound by becuase they bought a commercial MySQL license from MySQL AB. But I have to wonder, exactly how are they enforcing this "licensed for five users" bit and are the licenses of all the included softwares okay with this? Perl at least allows closed-source redistribution I think, what about the others?

    1. Re:What really caught my eye here: by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why the hell would anyone buy a webserver restricted to five users?

      Especially considering that some browsers will open two connections to load a page, and most will keep the connection open for a second or so just in case it needs to make more requests. If there are dialup users where each page load takes five seconds, and opens two connections, and users click about once every twenty seconds...you need ten people to render the website unusable, on average. (It can handle less dialup people than normal people, to show how silly this is.)

      Does anyone recall when the supposed 'advantage' (The only advantage) of Unix over Linux was that Unix scaled better? Does SCO releasing extremely crippled versions of Unix really help this concept?

      And, yes, it appears they are licensing the stack in addition to the OS, which makes no sense, because if you purchase their Unix, you can frickin go and download MySQL, Apache, and PHP/Perl/Python/whatever yourself.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    2. Re:What really caught my eye here: by duffbeer703 · · Score: 3, Informative

      SCO only allows a specific number of login shells to be active at once... it's really obnoxious.

      I worked at a place that used SCO OpenServer about 5 years ago... the costs were outrageous. At that time you had to buy additional users in multiples of 25, which cost about $5000 + 20% annual maintenance.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  14. IBM's countersuit by LightSail · · Score: 2, Informative

    IBM has a counterclaim for damages. Read Groklaw.net.

  15. Lets see by Groo+Wanderer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Does the lawsuit come for free, or is it extra? SCO sues their customers, so why again would I touch them, 10 foot pole or not?

    Then again, lets see about the technical merits. Other than the underlying OS, it is the same as the LAMP package. That means the choice is Linux vs SCO. From what I gather, SCO is:
    1) Less secure
    2) More expensive
    3) Prone to legal attacks toward users
    4) Far less supported
    5) Far less available software/plugins
    6) Has serious questions about the company being there in a year
    7) Laughably scalable
    8) Drivers?

    I could go on, but you get the point. The vultures are circling, and no amount of hand-waving is going to fix things.

                  -Charlie