I don't think I'm looking for conspiracy theories. I'm just surprised that the media are missing the bigger picture than the simple (and stupid) reaction "ZOMG! They can make a better Stuxnet!"... whatever. I doubt that was even what Anonymous intended by their leak.
But you certainly brought up a good point about the emails being available to anyone to investigate further... I just might have to do that. The sample email you posted certainly shows how opportunistic HBGary is/was... and how ignorant their customers were. I CAN HAZ EXPLOIT SOCIAL MEDIA. WANNA C?
I think everyone is missing the biggest point of whether or not Anonymous has access to the Stuxnet source code and that is, with the source code the actual creator could possibly be identified. Imagine if HBGary in some way knows what organization created Stuxnet or perhaps they had a hand in helping create it? The repercussions could be quite severe especially if it was as many claimed created by Israel with US backing. The idea in the article of the ways Anonymous could possible modify Stuxnet are simply stupid.
The other thing that everyone seems to be missing is the fact that HBGary also had in their possession a botnet that they were wanting to sell. Who would a company specializing in federal security be trying to sell a botnet to? This totally seems to be their modus operandi. "Hey government! Why create your own botnet that could be traced back to you? We can sell you one for a cheap million dollars!" Sort of the same thing they did with the Wikileaks stuff if you ask me.
And the last thing is how if the release of this information does confirm that some federal/government group did in fact have a hand in Stuxnet or was interested in buying a botnet, how totally idiotic they are in utililizing such an inept company like HBGary to help them. It really says something about security companies that specialize in government security contracts.
1. Download Metasploit/OllyDbg 2. Get Top Secret clearance 3. ??? 4. Profit!!!
Blah blah we love Linux blah blah IBM has no strategy blah blah blah we hate RedHat blah.
When will Sun get it through their thick skull? Linux is taking over in the data center and Solaris is a has been OS that won't be around much longer. What Sun needs to do is copy what IBM is doing... first get Linux running on every platform you make and this includes the 1 ways all the way to the huge StarFires. Second, port all your applications over to work in these new environments. Three, have a clear strategy of which OS they are going to focus on: Linux.
On the Solaris update issue, check out http://www.blastwave.org/
From the website: What is blastwave.org? blastwave.org is a collective effort to create a set of binary packages of free software, that can be automatically installed to a Solaris computer (sparc or x86 based) over the network.
According to InfoWorld, SCO is now claiming that in it's response to IBM interogatories, they have submitted no examples of copyright infrigement.
Blake Stowell is quoted as saying, "We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
Novell Inc. has decided to follow Hewlett-Packard Co.'s lead and indemnify its enterprise Linux customers against possible legal action by The SCO Group and/or others
Had a Compaq 1800xt with the 15in display and the lid hinge broke so that you could only either have the lid closed or laying all the way open/flat. The repair shop said it would have to replace the entire display for ~$900. Yikes! Freakin' more than the laptop was worth...
I also have a cousin who works for Compaq nee HP, and he looked it up and sure enough, there was no way to replace the 50 cent hinges without replacing the $850 screen.
Needless to say, the laptop was retired to the kitchen (used as a wireless terminal) and we purchased a new laptop. But I always thought this was a lone experience kind of thing. Now I know.
Have any other Compaq laptop owners had similar experiences with the lid of their laptop? I see a class action lawsuit. My laptop was only two years old...
I think these execs are not considering the ramifications of the long term effect of moving jobs offshore. Or they choose to ignore it because it won't affect their "current" stock price.
If they keep shipping these jobs overseas, there will be no one who can purchase the products.
Eventually, the very same companies that shipped their jobs overseas will go bankrupt themselves.
HP/Intel/Dell aren't exactly making all their profits by selling their products to India or China.
I've actually read in a couple of places in the last week how SCO and IBM will settle.
Isn't it interesting to see SCOX supporters like Lyons now claiming that this will be settled out of court? Why? Because SCOX has no fscking case? Even Lyon's realizes that they have no case and they can't keep making threats with nothing to back them up. Hell, they even threaten their own customers? This is not a normal company. It deserves to be wiped out.
It's like the fight scene in Monty Python's The Holy Grail with King Arthur and the black knight who has his legs and arms chopped off and says, "Shall we call it a draw?"
And then as we walk away, you can here in the background, "Come back you pansy! I'll make the LGPL illegal next!"
Perhaps the oldest piece of hardware I currently utilize in my main dual proc system is my original Hercules Monochrome ISA graphics card. I purchased it with my first XT (1984?) and I have it connected to a 8 inch monochrome screen that is absolutely beautiful for running console programs using mdacon.
Sure I have two other graphics cards in the machine, but for a dedicated console running top or some other console utility like a long compile, its great.
This is a copy of the letter I sent to Microlite and Snap Appliance.
Dear Sirs and Madams;
My company is in the process of purchasing Snap Server 4500s for our workgroup environments and the 14000 for our data center needs. We looked at a number of solutions from different vendors and decided on the 4500 and 14000 because of their performance, use of Linux, and added features. One of those features was the inclusion of Microlite's Backup Express for backup to an external tape device.
Now it has come to our attention that Microlite is sponsoring The SCO Group's City to City Tour. As a company actively involved in using/developing GNU/Linux and other open source software, we find the Microlite sponsorship of a SCO Group deeply offending as we feel that SCO is basically trying to extort licensing from companies without having any right to do so and having not proven any thing in a court of law.
As such, we have decided to place the purchase order on hold and reevaluate other NAS devices. If Microlite does not remove sponsorship of the SCO Group's City to City Tour, we will recommend that the Snap Servers not be considered for purchase.
The saddest part for me is the fact that a great company with so much potential is basically reduced to a pittance (23 Mil for a company that Apple almost purchased for big bucks)
Hey Microsoft! No matter how much money you have or how many companies you copy, mimic, or destroy... you will never, and I repeat NEVER, develop anything remotely as cool as a BeBox with BeOS running on it!
This is so true of most emplyees who work at Microsoft. I myself worked there for about three months in a sysadmin support type function and even with the Code Red outbreak crashing the internal Microsoft network to the point where even the call center couldn't route calls to support agents, they kept saying, "Microsoft is the greatest! Damn hackers did this."
I got the fscking out of there before being assimilated.
The saddest part for me is the fact that a great company with so much potential is basically reduced to a pittance (23 Mil for a company that Apple almost purchased for big bucks) and all the magic of the BeOS is gone...
Hey Microsoft! No matter how much money you have or how many companies you copy, mimic, or destroy... you will never, and I repeat NEVER, develop anything remotely as cool a as BeBox with BeOS running on it!
When I worked for the evil empire, I was amazed at how many Linux/*nix/*BSD machines they had on the network, either from users running it or for testing in the lab.
Because I supported the desktops for call center people, I didn't have direct access to the ITG (Information Technology Group) management software. So instead, I found an old DEC dual p200, installed Linux on it, set up Nagios and started monitoring the ITG servers. I could call ITG to alert them of a DHCP server not assigning addresses before they could. And this happened a lot actually.
The most shocking thing about working at Microsoft during the Code Red, and Nimda outbreak, was finding out how much Microsoft eats their own dogfood. And they really do, even if that means putting untested servers into a production enviroment. The Nimda outbreak literally brought the whole corporate network to it's knees. Even the phone systems were down.
But Microsoft running Linux? Old news, in fact I think the Linux machine I made and placed under my desk in my office, is probably still monitoring the network better than the Microsoft software they used. Probably has better uptime too.
We've made a lot of progress with open source intrusion detection devices (IDS) in the last few years, with SNORT many times beating out similar offerings from commercial companies.
But so far, we have only been attempting to detect and report possible intrusions into private networks or studying attack vectors using Honeypots.
There has been a lot of talk lately about the possibility of using independent worms that fix vulnerabilities in network hosts so that those hosts aren't used as an attack vectors to compromise/disable other hosts.
Instead of just detecting and reporting intrusions or active worms fixing vulnerabilites, how do you feel about having IDS systems reporting to a host/daemon that would then launch protective countermeasures against the possible detected intrusion?
Do you seriously think they should worry about doing business with a little bitty entity that's gonna get all shrill and boycotty because of political ideology regarding IP rights?
My "little bitty entity" is more concerned for the ramifications of the lawsuit, as it pertains to the purchase of software. No more; no less. I would say most companies are also thinking along these same lines. Companies are in the business of protecting their investments in software. You don't go out and buy $150K software without thinking of the reprecussions if something were to occur.
Your company was planning to steal SCO code and inject it into an OSS project?
No, the question was regarding our development on a software emulation system that runs on SCO Unix and the ramifications of the SCO vs. IBM lawsuit.
If IBM pulls support for running s390 on SCO Unix using the FLEX-ES system because of the lawsuit, where does that leave our investment of SCO software? I'll tell you, it would leave us with a four way running SCO Unix with no applications or purpose. And I'd also like to remind you that the hardware cost is not a significant expenditure when compared to the entire system cost of software licenses and support.
So the question I was trying to ask was even after the lawsuit is completed in the courts and say SCO continues on in what ever fashion they can, why would anybody purchase their software? If any company were to purchase software designed to run on SCO Unix, but SCO decides to sue the application vendor or a related party for IP infringement, where does that leave a company's investment in SCO software?
In the last couple of months, my company tasked me with trying to come up with a way for our developers to start porting some of our enterprise applications to zOS and Linux/390. We didn't have the budget for a mainframe, and Hercules would probably work, but we'd still need a license from IBM to get zOS. This is not cheap or easy.
Then I discovered FLEX-ES from FSI. This emulator comes with a legal s390 license from IBM and seemed like a great solution to our problem. Except that it runs on SCO Unix. They also have a Linux version, but it might not support some of our hardware requirements.
Because of the lawsuit your company has filed against IBM, we have decided not to purchase this software, or the underlining SCO Unix OS license.
Now I'm sure my company's small purchase wouldn't help out a company expecting a billion dollar settlement that much. But if my company is not willing to purchase your flagship OS for fear of the reprocussions, how many other companies out there will also not purchase SCO based products or licenses...
If SCO is to continue in the future, come what may from the lawsuit, how do you expect companies to purchase products from you without fear of a future lawsuit against another company for IP infringement?
Although kind of true at the time, great strides have bee made recently in getting 2.4 SMP working on 32bit SPARC. 2.4 UP has been working for some time now.
You should check out the latest kernels, 2.4.21-pre5 from Rob Radez available for download at http://osinvestor.com/sparc/debs/
There are still some issues to work out like swapon segfaults, but otherwise it's pretty stable.
I agree that they aren't a direct "target" but how else do we cause serious financial repercussions to the Canopy Group?
If we say we will not purchase or recommend the purchase or utilize any of the products from ANY of the companies associated with the Canopy Group, then the Canopy Group will receive pressure from not only from other third parties like us but also from their own companies in their portfolio to stop the lawsuit.
I'm not really worried about IBM not winning the case, I'm more worried about the fact that many companies out there will start to reconsider their utilizing a great OS/toolset at a time when Linux is starting to really gain momentum.
We all know big companies like to play it safe. To them, the potential result of SCO winning this lawsuit is that it opens the door for further financial/licensing burdens to be placed on the software that they originally thought was free of this burden. Just the thought of that occuring will either stop or pause many projects until the case is resolved either way.
This has nothing to do with KDE versus GNOME either. It has to do with the potential damage caused to the whole GNU, Open Source, Linux, free software movement. And since Trolltech utilizes the GPL, it affects them also.
Too true. But when you suggest not using SCO products or Canopy Group companies products, does this include KDE because it uses TrollTech QT? Trolltech is a Canopy Group portfolio company according to the Canopy website. not to mention
They don't start with a couple of smaller fish, but instead go for the biggest whale in the sea. They should file for Chapter 7 tomorrow. Even the analysts think this is lame.
The best quote in the CNET story is from the suit itself which says and I quote, "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM," So all that hard work all the developers and Linux did for the last 10 years were for nothing.
And there you have it. SCO is dead. How can SCO sell a Linux product anymore when they themselves are saying, "Hey, we don't know how Linux could have gotten so good. It must have been from misappropoation of our trade secrets."
Who in their right mind would buy anything from these losers?
Actually, you're wrong. You're right about coding to C, Java, and Weblogic, but you are completely wrong about no new applictions being writen to the mainframe.
I think you forgot Weblogic also runs on mainframes. In fact, if you develope an app that uses either WebSphere or WebLogic, you are one skip and a hop from developing a mainframe app.
For that matter, since Linux runs on s390, if you're developing a Linux app right now, you are developing for the mainframe.
Mainframes aren't dead, and I would say that many companies that thought of getting rid of them, are now happy to be keeping the big iron around.
Slashdot Mirror
Proving once again that rocket scientists are the smartest people in the room
I don't think I'm looking for conspiracy theories. I'm just surprised that the media are missing the bigger picture than the simple (and stupid) reaction "ZOMG! They can make a better Stuxnet!"... whatever. I doubt that was even what Anonymous intended by their leak.
But you certainly brought up a good point about the emails being available to anyone to investigate further... I just might have to do that. The sample email you posted certainly shows how opportunistic HBGary is/was... and how ignorant their customers were. I CAN HAZ EXPLOIT SOCIAL MEDIA. WANNA C?
I think everyone is missing the biggest point of whether or not Anonymous has access to the Stuxnet source code and that is, with the source code the actual creator could possibly be identified. Imagine if HBGary in some way knows what organization created Stuxnet or perhaps they had a hand in helping create it? The repercussions could be quite severe especially if it was as many claimed created by Israel with US backing. The idea in the article of the ways Anonymous could possible modify Stuxnet are simply stupid.
The other thing that everyone seems to be missing is the fact that HBGary also had in their possession a botnet that they were wanting to sell. Who would a company specializing in federal security be trying to sell a botnet to? This totally seems to be their modus operandi. "Hey government! Why create your own botnet that could be traced back to you? We can sell you one for a cheap million dollars!" Sort of the same thing they did with the Wikileaks stuff if you ask me.
And the last thing is how if the release of this information does confirm that some federal/government group did in fact have a hand in Stuxnet or was interested in buying a botnet, how totally idiotic they are in utililizing such an inept company like HBGary to help them. It really says something about security companies that specialize in government security contracts.
1. Download Metasploit/OllyDbg
2. Get Top Secret clearance
3. ???
4. Profit!!!
Blah blah
we love Linux
blah blah
IBM has no strategy
blah blah blah
we hate RedHat blah.
When will Sun get it through their thick skull? Linux is taking over in the data center and Solaris is a has been OS that won't be around much longer. What Sun needs to do is copy what IBM is doing... first get Linux running on every platform you make and this includes the 1 ways all the way to the huge StarFires. Second, port all your applications over to work in these new environments. Three, have a clear strategy of which OS they are going to focus on: Linux.
On the Solaris update issue, check out http://www.blastwave.org/
From the website:
What is blastwave.org?
blastwave.org is a collective effort to create a set of binary packages of free software, that can be automatically installed to a Solaris computer (sparc or x86 based) over the network.
According to InfoWorld, SCO is now claiming that in it's response to IBM interogatories, they have submitted no examples of copyright infrigement.
Blake Stowell is quoted as saying, "We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
Seems quite odd when a SCO press release from yesterday says exactly the opposite. Old Darl said this, "SCO is willing to enforce our copyright claims down to the end user level and in the coming days and weeks, we will make this evident in our actions."
What freakin planet are these guys from? I'm sorry, but I despise them like I despise neo-nazi, racists, thugs.
I'm sorry that I ever bought a Caldera product...
Novell Inc. has decided to follow Hewlett-Packard Co.'s lead and indemnify its enterprise Linux customers against possible legal action by The SCO Group and/or others
More at:
eWeek
Had a Compaq 1800xt with the 15in display and the lid hinge broke so that you could only either have the lid closed or laying all the way open/flat. The repair shop said it would have to replace the entire display for ~$900. Yikes! Freakin' more than the laptop was worth...
I also have a cousin who works for Compaq nee HP, and he looked it up and sure enough, there was no way to replace the 50 cent hinges without replacing the $850 screen.
Needless to say, the laptop was retired to the kitchen (used as a wireless terminal) and we purchased a new laptop. But I always thought this was a lone experience kind of thing. Now I know.
Have any other Compaq laptop owners had similar experiences with the lid of their laptop? I see a class action lawsuit. My laptop was only two years old...
I think these execs are not considering the ramifications of the long term effect of moving jobs offshore. Or they choose to ignore it because it won't affect their "current" stock price.
If they keep shipping these jobs overseas, there will be no one who can purchase the products.
Eventually, the very same companies that shipped their jobs overseas will go bankrupt themselves.
HP/Intel/Dell aren't exactly making all their profits by selling their products to India or China.
I've actually read in a couple of places in the last week how SCO and IBM will settle.
Isn't it interesting to see SCOX supporters like Lyons now claiming that this will be settled out of court? Why? Because SCOX has no fscking case? Even Lyon's realizes that they have no case and they can't keep making threats with nothing to back them up. Hell, they even threaten their own customers? This is not a normal company. It deserves to be wiped out.
It's like the fight scene in Monty Python's The Holy Grail with King Arthur and the black knight who has his legs and arms chopped off and says, "Shall we call it a draw?"
And then as we walk away, you can here in the background, "Come back you pansy! I'll make the LGPL illegal next!"
If you don't like GPL software so much and it's so unconstitutional, STOP FUCKING RELEASING IT!
Fscking morons!
Perhaps the oldest piece of hardware I currently utilize in my main dual proc system is my original Hercules Monochrome ISA graphics card. I purchased it with my first XT (1984?) and I have it connected to a 8 inch monochrome screen that is absolutely beautiful for running console programs using mdacon.
Sure I have two other graphics cards in the machine, but for a dedicated console running top or some other console utility like a long compile, its great.
This is a copy of the letter I sent to Microlite and Snap Appliance.
Dear Sirs and Madams;
My company is in the process of purchasing Snap Server 4500s for our workgroup environments and the 14000 for our data center needs. We looked at a number of solutions from different vendors and decided on the 4500 and 14000 because of their performance, use of Linux, and added features. One of those features was the inclusion of Microlite's Backup Express for backup to an external tape device.
Now it has come to our attention that Microlite is sponsoring The SCO Group's City to City Tour. As a company actively involved in using/developing GNU/Linux and other open source software, we find the Microlite sponsorship of a SCO Group deeply offending as we feel that SCO is basically trying to extort licensing from companies without having any right to do so and having not proven any thing in a court of law.
As such, we have decided to place the purchase order on hold and reevaluate other NAS devices. If Microlite does not remove sponsorship of the SCO Group's City to City Tour, we will recommend that the Snap Servers not be considered for purchase.
Sincerely,
Me
The saddest part for me is the fact that a great company with so much potential is basically reduced to a pittance (23 Mil for a company that Apple almost purchased for big bucks)
Hey Microsoft! No matter how much money you have or how many companies you copy, mimic, or destroy... you will never, and I repeat NEVER, develop anything remotely as cool as a BeBox with BeOS running on it!
This is so true of most emplyees who work at Microsoft. I myself worked there for about three months in a sysadmin support type function and even with the Code Red outbreak crashing the internal Microsoft network to the point where even the call center couldn't route calls to support agents, they kept saying, "Microsoft is the greatest! Damn hackers did this."
I got the fscking out of there before being assimilated.
The saddest part for me is the fact that a great company with so much potential is basically reduced to a pittance (23 Mil for a company that Apple almost purchased for big bucks) and all the magic of the BeOS is gone...
Hey Microsoft! No matter how much money you have or how many companies you copy, mimic, or destroy... you will never, and I repeat NEVER, develop anything remotely as cool a as BeBox with BeOS running on it!
When I worked for the evil empire, I was amazed at how many Linux/*nix/*BSD machines they had on the network, either from users running it or for testing in the lab.
Because I supported the desktops for call center people, I didn't have direct access to the ITG (Information Technology Group) management software. So instead, I found an old DEC dual p200, installed Linux on it, set up Nagios and started monitoring the ITG servers. I could call ITG to alert them of a DHCP server not assigning addresses before they could. And this happened a lot actually.
The most shocking thing about working at Microsoft during the Code Red, and Nimda outbreak, was finding out how much Microsoft eats their own dogfood. And they really do, even if that means putting untested servers into a production enviroment. The Nimda outbreak literally brought the whole corporate network to it's knees. Even the phone systems were down.
But Microsoft running Linux? Old news, in fact I think the Linux machine I made and placed under my desk in my office, is probably still monitoring the network better than the Microsoft software they used. Probably has better uptime too.
We've made a lot of progress with open source intrusion detection devices (IDS) in the last few years, with SNORT many times beating out similar offerings from commercial companies.
But so far, we have only been attempting to detect and report possible intrusions into private networks or studying attack vectors using Honeypots.
There has been a lot of talk lately about the possibility of using independent worms that fix vulnerabilities in network hosts so that those hosts aren't used as an attack vectors to compromise/disable other hosts.
Instead of just detecting and reporting intrusions or active worms fixing vulnerabilites, how do you feel about having IDS systems reporting to a host/daemon that would then launch protective countermeasures against the possible detected intrusion?
Thanks. BTW, Nmap ROCKS!
Do you seriously think they should worry about doing business with a little bitty entity that's gonna get all shrill and boycotty because of political ideology regarding IP rights?
My "little bitty entity" is more concerned for the ramifications of the lawsuit, as it pertains to the purchase of software. No more; no less. I would say most companies are also thinking along these same lines. Companies are in the business of protecting their investments in software. You don't go out and buy $150K software without thinking of the reprecussions if something were to occur.
Your company was planning to steal SCO code and inject it into an OSS project?
No, the question was regarding our development on a software emulation system that runs on SCO Unix and the ramifications of the SCO vs. IBM lawsuit.
If IBM pulls support for running s390 on SCO Unix using the FLEX-ES system because of the lawsuit, where does that leave our investment of SCO software? I'll tell you, it would leave us with a four way running SCO Unix with no applications or purpose. And I'd also like to remind you that the hardware cost is not a significant expenditure when compared to the entire system cost of software licenses and support.
So the question I was trying to ask was even after the lawsuit is completed in the courts and say SCO continues on in what ever fashion they can, why would anybody purchase their software? If any company were to purchase software designed to run on SCO Unix, but SCO decides to sue the application vendor or a related party for IP infringement, where does that leave a company's investment in SCO software?
In the last couple of months, my company tasked me with trying to come up with a way for our developers to start porting some of our enterprise applications to zOS and Linux/390. We didn't have the budget for a mainframe, and Hercules would probably work, but we'd still need a license from IBM to get zOS. This is not cheap or easy.
Then I discovered FLEX-ES from FSI. This emulator comes with a legal s390 license from IBM and seemed like a great solution to our problem. Except that it runs on SCO Unix. They also have a Linux version, but it might not support some of our hardware requirements.
Because of the lawsuit your company has filed against IBM, we have decided not to purchase this software, or the underlining SCO Unix OS license.
Now I'm sure my company's small purchase wouldn't help out a company expecting a billion dollar settlement that much. But if my company is not willing to purchase your flagship OS for fear of the reprocussions, how many other companies out there will also not purchase SCO based products or licenses...
If SCO is to continue in the future, come what may from the lawsuit, how do you expect companies to purchase products from you without fear of a future lawsuit against another company for IP infringement?
Although kind of true at the time, great strides have bee made recently in getting 2.4 SMP working on 32bit SPARC. 2.4 UP has been working for some time now.
You should check out the latest kernels, 2.4.21-pre5 from Rob Radez available for download at http://osinvestor.com/sparc/debs/
There are still some issues to work out like swapon segfaults, but otherwise it's pretty stable.
I agree that they aren't a direct "target" but how else do we cause serious financial repercussions to the Canopy Group?
If we say we will not purchase or recommend the purchase or utilize any of the products from ANY of the companies associated with the Canopy Group, then the Canopy Group will receive pressure from not only from other third parties like us but also from their own companies in their portfolio to stop the lawsuit.
I'm not really worried about IBM not winning the case, I'm more worried about the fact that many companies out there will start to reconsider their utilizing a great OS/toolset at a time when Linux is starting to really gain momentum.
We all know big companies like to play it safe. To them, the potential result of SCO winning this lawsuit is that it opens the door for further financial/licensing burdens to be placed on the software that they originally thought was free of this burden. Just the thought of that occuring will either stop or pause many projects until the case is resolved either way.
This has nothing to do with KDE versus GNOME either. It has to do with the potential damage caused to the whole GNU, Open Source, Linux, free software movement. And since Trolltech utilizes the GPL, it affects them also.
Too true. But when you suggest not using SCO products or Canopy Group companies products, does this include KDE because it uses TrollTech QT? Trolltech is a Canopy Group portfolio company according to the Canopy website. not to mention
They don't start with a couple of smaller fish, but instead go for the biggest whale in the sea. They should file for Chapter 7 tomorrow. Even the analysts think this is lame.
The best quote in the CNET story is from the suit itself which says and I quote, "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM," So all that hard work all the developers and Linux did for the last 10 years were for nothing.
And there you have it. SCO is dead. How can SCO sell a Linux product anymore when they themselves are saying, "Hey, we don't know how Linux could have gotten so good. It must have been from misappropoation of our trade secrets."
Who in their right mind would buy anything from these losers?
Actually, you're wrong. You're right about coding to C, Java, and Weblogic, but you are completely wrong about no new applictions being writen to the mainframe.
I think you forgot Weblogic also runs on mainframes. In fact, if you develope an app that uses either WebSphere or WebLogic, you are one skip and a hop from developing a mainframe app.
For that matter, since Linux runs on s390, if you're developing a Linux app right now, you are developing for the mainframe.
Mainframes aren't dead, and I would say that many companies that thought of getting rid of them, are now happy to be keeping the big iron around.
Just wish I had one to play around with...