Slashdot Mirror
SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits
AlanS2002 sends in a link from a local Utah newspaper covering the SCO-IBM trial. The Deseret News chose to emphasize SCO's claim that IBM hurt SCO's relationship with several high-tech powerhouses, causing SCO's market share and revenues to plummet. "[A]n attorney for Lindon-based SCO said IBM 'pressured' companies to cut off their relationships with SCO. And 'the effect on SCO was devastating and it was immediate'..." As usual Groklaw has chapter and verse on all the arguments in the motions for summary judgement.
Isn't that what competition is about? Taking business from competitors?
I fear the Y2038 bug
Probably SCO should have thought about this before suing IBM for billions of dollars (with fake claims.)
You can't handle the truth.
The theme "not our fault". When will these jokers die? Wasn't it SCO suing it's own customers that might have had something to do with their profit loss? Or their millions spent on flimsy legal activities? Might it have been... oh what's the point, it is all too ridiculous anymore. There's just about nothing that can be said that hasn't not been said ad infinitum already. This stuff almost doesn't rate as 'news' anymore, just another spewing forth from the absurd. The news will be when this is over and their corpse rotting.
Can we call this one a dead horse and move on?
SCO did plenty of hurt to their own selves when they fired letter-shots across the bow of companies using Linux.
IBM hurt the relationship between SCO and other people by fighting SCO's copyright suit. By fighting the copyright suit, it pissed off many people who decided to move away from SCO lest they may be sued in a few years.
Fight Spammers!
Do a little research on "Amdahl". You'll learn very quickly how IBM used to treat competitors, back in the age of big iron, long before Microsoft was even a gleam in Bill Gates' eye. Sure, they've "re-invented" themselves in the past couple decades but we're still talking about Big Blue. SCO would have been better off tangling with the IRS.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Since when was IBM responsible for SCO's profits?
SCO Xenix cough Openserver has the been the worst unix out on the market for almost 20 years and Caldera's Openlinux lite sucked goatballs. Old sco has the opportunity to make Openserver more like Solaris, AIX, and Linux for over 2 decades but decided to make it stagnant for decades.
Worse SCO intentionally crippled its product by not having standard components like a TCP/IP stack unless of course you pay $1200 or something outrageous. No gnu tools, no debuggers, no well just about anything to troubleshoot a dying sco.
But it seems IBM hurt SCO not by endoring Linux but SCO's crappy linux distro and lottery ticket. Darl McBride won over $26 million personally from the disk compression lawsuit from MS that was included with DOS 6. I think he wanted the same thing to happen with Linux and they were hoping old sco would provide. Bad move.
SCO has itself to blame and they could have been the next redhat or maybe sun if old sco actually improved their os 20 years ago. Its time it died like other companies who made poor business decisions.
http://saveie6.com/
- An OS that hasn't be updated in forever
- Absolutely no native software
- A decent chance of being sued by SCO for no real reason.
- A decent chance of being sued by IBM or someone in the Linux world for using software that SCO distributed in violation of the GPL
- An absolute lack of techies with experience in your platform
- The 50% "conscience" bonus you need to pay your admins to work with SCO
I'm moving my servers to SCO today!!