I would rather sell SCO's stock (symbol: SCOX) short, so it goes under $1 per share for over 3 months and then it'd be delisted from Nasdaq. Once delisted it'd be only traded as OTC stock like those many almost worthless stocks out there. But even without selling it short SCOX has a pretty good chance of going under $1 on its own in the near future, since its technicals show that it's getting grossly overbought and which means the reversal is likely.
"The situation doesn't look like it's going to improve, either - at least not within the decade, and probably longer" - I believe you're right about that or though I would give it even longer time, say 20-25 years before things get better. Why? Becasuse this sytem is f-up, corrupt and too old to get another growth phase like it was in the 90ies when recruiters begged you to get in touch with them. Now, you have to chase recruiters if any are left out there. Things changed so much that it is already scarry. So, what is my plan? Do what you can, I'm doing MS, but even that might not be enought, because believe me people who are less qualified but have personal connections will keep their jobs and prevent more quality workers from replacing them. It's the game of survival now, egos get very edgy and cunning when it comes to game of survival, people of low morale through personal connections will do everything to keep the world from changing, because if the world changes they have to go, so there will be a lot those personal and bitter fights ahead. At the end good karma will win, I'm sure.
He, he, that's for sure, axis is the imaginary line in space around which a planet revolves, so the axis of evil is a revolving priciple of nasty and hstile forces that even if eliminated for one, two years will again revolve into a new phase. So, that way it is a perpetual kind of war of fighting and then fighting more of eveil forces, since they revolve there's no end to their subsequent new phases. So it goes, G.W.B. needs to learn some physics.
I would pretty much agree with that scenario except that it will take a lot shorter time until the next boom, I predict it about 2035-39, then there will be a tremendous boom in technology especially combined with microbiology, new physics and astronomy, health services and travel, etc., a wonder to behold. I mean the future is bright but it will take a lot of effort to clean up the messes of the present system, which is already too old and corrupt to progress further, so it needs to be crashed completely before a new one comes along. The next year 2004 will probably start that process in a big way. What we've seen is nothing! Just a soft prelude so far.
You don't have to lie, just say you were an independent IT consultant, which you were since you have some skills that match that descrption (you know what that is I'm just gessing). Did you do any IT related work at that time even if it was for free? Include those project even if you stayed at home and worked on some problem, it was a project, right? You probably learned something from home-based projects, etc. Not being employed doesn't mean you were not progressing in your chosen discipline or specialization. So, self-employed category is also employment unless someone defines employment as receiving wages for services. But they probably won't ask ab. it. Hey, I'm also unemploled but am not so lucky, I don' get responses from recruiters, etc, so good luck to you.
Re:Why is MS so much slower than Apple?
on
Looking at Longhorn
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
"Finally I must mention that I have seen more Microsoft hardware this year than Mac hardware or software...." - you're either misinformed or under informed. A friend of mine was just terminated with his "hardware" team from Microsoft, because as their management said they're trying to get out of hardware business including overrated X-box. They're also closing all Web-TV operations.
According to that friend Microsoft has no real vision for the future and just tries to dupe users into constantly upgrading, buying new hardware to sustain new software upgrades and pushing licensing schemas that are more likely to drive users into Linux. Running Longhorn would require expensive hardware upgrades and since economy is not coming back in any visible way people will not spend money to buy more hardware. Microsoft may become a victim of its own strategy that doesn't account for this new economic reality where people and IT shops will have fewer and fewer dollards to spend on M$ products.
"unless they can show exactly when and who put it in the code..." - that's a good point, but also presuming that it is indeed their code. So, there's a chain of co-dependent pieces of evidence needed here: they have to show code is theirs, then that it was taken out of their product, and finally identify someone who and when did it. Because if it was done before their UNIX was acquired from Novell, then Novell should get at least a share of the settlement, if SCO wins the case, which is a big, big IF. Since Novell is not part of the plaintiff then it complicates the matter. But also maybe Novell, or whoever owned UNIX before them released some of that code and if they did there's no point for this lawsuit whatsoever.
It depends on what you what the system to do. For desktop I settled on Xandros Desktop Deluxe 1.0, which is better equipped for desktop use than most distros I've seen or used. For example I can open up my "c:/NTFS" partition with MS Windows and copy files from there wile working in KDE, or can login into Windows domain without a lot of Samba configuration, or have my Photoshop 6.0 installed and running as well as MS Office, which is done with CrossOver Office that comes with Deluxe edition of Xandros, etc., (otherwise it is a separate product that cost around $57 alone - new version 2.0 just came out).
Some people say why should MS apps be used while running Linux desktop. But that's a hard-line attitude and not business-like, because if you got a legal copy of MS Office and don't want to install Windows OS, still you can use it in Linux with CrossOver Office. Since Gimp is too limited for me and I need PowerPoint for my classes and presentations and OpenOffice or Star Office will not do things that I need, I'm happy with that solution of running MS apps on Xandros. Also in that category is Visio - a very useful tool, not to mention that I hope to run AutoCAD as well in the near future.
The only problem I have so far is that Java VM support in Internet Explorer 5.5/6.0 in CO Office has some problems, which is required for some applets to run such as financial streaming stock market data. But definitely, I can live without any rpm major Linux distribution that is out there including their newer version.
"M$ future"? - there's no future for M$, I guess I'm even more radical than you are in the assessment of M$. Here's why. The econ is going bad, people spending less and less money, today's released numbers in new housing construction tell that construction is down by 11%, and that's just a starter, or rather the follow up on the downtrend that started in March 2000 in US economy. The coming war with Iraq will deepen the crisis, by far. The time is coming that most people and businesses won't be able to afford M$ upgrades, licenses, etc. So, M$ empire is doomed, he? Well, not so fast, they will fight to "own" your business by implementing.NET, some say.NOT, but the point is that inevitably M$ won't be needed in the next cycle of soft dev when OpenS will rule the world, right? Well, let's hope so, he he.
Well, thanks, that article is indeed a great read and names things as they are. In addition, while corporate world is trying to cope with new realities of the bear market, Open Source initiatives are better positioned to survive this new and cruel world corporate destruction.
It's because it's Open Source. Is Solaris Open S?, no?, so how come we even argue these apples and oranges nonsense? UNIX is not Open S. because it's vendors want to preserve the business advantage they perceive it has. At the same time Linux is gaining ground despite a capitalist desire for profit and so now Sun M. people say, "well, Linux is such a web of different things, who knows how it'll be maintained?" But the point is that it can be done, and it is done.
"...how about free hardware for all?", hey, are you a communist or something, well it wouldn't be so bad, by the way, it'd complement Linux to have hardware free. "Imagine all the people" having free hardware and software. No more MS sham, no more proprietary OS, all is cool, groovy. I'd like that, rocking. But it'll take some time. In any case, we're heading that way. MS, Sun M., IBM, HP, etc, won't survive this economic nightmare, my view. Don't quote me on that.
So, now we have 2.4.something kernel. What will that do for you? Improve your income, get your bills paid on time? None of those, it'll be just another of those slashdot's announcement. People will do whatever and post myriads meaningless messages. None will talk about things that are relevant and none will do anything to improve failing economy, including IBM that suppose to support Linux but is reluctant to hire those laid off Linux engineers, support engineers, etc. It's all going to nuts! Do you think RHat will survive this downturn? Tell me about it!
Almost every expert on this matter will tell you that h.d. larger than 40GB is an inefficient way of data storage. Why? Because seek/read/write ratios on those drives are slower even if you increase RPMs (rotational speed). For fast access needs and I/O operations smaller drives are better, not to mention that when a larger h.d. fails it is moree costly to change it that a smaller drive. Larger drive cost more, right? It's the selling that drives the capacity. But this is one of those crazy things that comapanies like to propage to increase its sales, "I did this, I did that". I don't think anyone cares about it anymore.
The difference with SuSE is that while they closed or almost closed all US operations, they still can release English distro of their own. On the other hand the US Turbo was an independent business entity from its Asia operations. They had the same name but separate financing, etc. That became the fact over a year ago, which was not widely publicized. Since US Turbo run out of cash it couldn't be helped by its Asian folks anymore. That "ingenious" plan was implemented under the current CEO Ly-Huong Pham, who took over after Paul Thomas. So, most probably, we won't see English based Turbo software in a while. Yet you can say Turbolinux brand will survive in Asia, so it isn't entirely gone. Asian Turbolinux distro is more desktop oriented while US Turbo was into servers and mainframes.
Apparently you have some bigger bone to grind with LinuxGram, by saying that "they completely and deliberately missed everything" you aren't proving anything, it's just your opinion. So, what did they miss by the way? That US Turbo is going under? That's the fact even if some leftovers could survive another year.
Since the beginning of the last year, when Ly Huong Pham took over as the CEO at Turbolinux Inc., there's nothing but problems for that company. Some of the problems were created before she became the head, but on the other hand whatever was left was mismanaged, in my opinion. She didn't react fast enough to the changing reality of the broader global market while let the Asia-Pacific operations in China, Korea and Japon to create their own independent business entities. Therefore, when the US division in Brisbane, CA, became short of cash there was no way to rescue it by reallocating assets from Asia. As it turned out it was the Asian divisions that had better cash flow than the US' Turbo. But she herself created this situation in the first place. When she went to Korea and talked to Samsung's managers everyone admired her intelligence. But that meant really nothing business wise. It was a PR on-the-road show.
The other point is that in the latest disclaimer by the Turbo's CEO on Linuxtoday.com, she was "...blaming the reorganization on the withdrawal of a still unidentified investor from a round of funding." What kind of round finding?, they already had III rounds of funding of which nothing is left. Now, when someone pulls out from the next round of funding and that means the new round of layoffs (called "reorganization") what does that say about the company's health? It means they're so strapped for cash that even one investor means making it or else. It's a dire straits situation. So, let Ly Huong Pham better stop deluding other people that Turbolinux Inc. in the US can survive, I wouldn't mind if she stepped down altogether, because there's no basis to show that her reign will do any good.
They had this last layoffs at Turbo from what was left from the last year's layoffs, what was left from the prev. y's layoffs, etc. So, when the Turbo's current CEO Ly Huang Pham says they're still surviving how credible that is? What is surviving?, few managers who mismanaged their resources? Obviously, in the series of layoffs managers were able to keep their positions, some left on their own, but the bottom line is that managers had no credible buss model for that company in the time like this, the only solution they have is to layoff more people. So, LinuxGram's reporting that Turbolinux is going under is not far from the truth even if they missed something.
Almost to date a year ago when I got my pink slip from US Turbolinux Inc. there were only 4-6 software engineers left, 3 people in pre-sale, 3-4 marketing, just one in tech support(!) and say 4 in QA, not counting HR, Finance, and management. So, that was 30-40 head count and also 12-15 in TurboLabs. Then there were more layoffs after I left in QA, now another "restructuring"? What would that mean? Ly-Huang Pham got laid off? That would be perhaps the most appropriate thing to do since when she became the CEO things go down and down again for them, all that happened on her watch.
The reason you think that way is that Turbo focused on server rather than desktop Linux. They had several good server products including IA64, IMB's eServer Linux for mainframes, better than Red Hat's, in my opinion. SuSE was the other solid player in that space. When RH finally released their GA S/390 Linux it had a lot of problems, still IBM went with RH and SuSE as the second. IBM to some extent played a role in the demise of Turbo, in my opinion, because it didn't reliably back up Turbo as its Buss. Partner. The other part was mismanagement of financial reserves Turbo had in the amount of over $15ml only 1.5yr ago. When you rent two almost empty huge building floors in the Bay Area and keep paying big rentals, what do you expect of you cash reservers to become? It was 100% waste, the other was failed merger with Linuxcare that took several $mls as well.
There's nothing like Linux, didn't you notice yet? It's not software, it's not different coding phylosophy, it's the free human spirit. Nothing can kill that because it is truly free enterprise that has no bounds.
Indeed, in my opinion too, or though not an IBM's employee, Turbo had good eServer products and was ahead by far of RedHat in that regard. That was never noticed by the mainstream Linux pros though, because everyone on Slashdot is talking Linux desktop. So, it is sad that Turbo might be gone now. But IBM made its decission of supporting RedHat despite the fact that other Linux distros were beter for eServer. That was a mistake in my view becuase it create the perceprion that RedHat is the only strong Linux distro. Quantity came before qaulity, that may hunt IBM in the long run.
That's correct, they were never a public company and cash reservs that they had when I joyned them at end the end of 2000 was $30ml. In less than a year that became just $5 after the failed merger with Linuxcare (they had to pay the laweyrs' fees in several millions for that failed attempt). Since venture capital dried up in this kind of bear market they have no way of keeping the business going. That will impact to some extent companies such as IBM, because Turbo had several server products for their eServer. IBM helped SuSE In a similar situation, but IBM is having its own difficulties.
I agree, several server products were very good actually, say EnFuzion, ClusterServer, PowerCockpit. I worked for them too. The way I see it is that the upper management was not able to react fast enought to the changing market conditions. Instead of saving and constrain they kept spending $ on extra unoccupied floor rental, failed Linuxcare merger, and thir managers destroyed and outsourced their tech support, so there was no violable incentive to buy their even good products.
Slashdot Mirror
I would rather sell SCO's stock (symbol: SCOX) short, so it goes under $1 per share for over 3 months and then it'd be delisted from Nasdaq. Once delisted it'd be only traded as OTC stock like those many almost worthless stocks out there. But even without selling it short SCOX has a pretty good chance of going under $1 on its own in the near future, since its technicals show that it's getting grossly overbought and which means the reversal is likely.
"The situation doesn't look like it's going to improve, either - at least not within the decade, and probably longer" - I believe you're right about that or though I would give it even longer time, say 20-25 years before things get better. Why? Becasuse this sytem is f-up, corrupt and too old to get another growth phase like it was in the 90ies when recruiters begged you to get in touch with them. Now, you have to chase recruiters if any are left out there. Things changed so much that it is already scarry. So, what is my plan? Do what you can, I'm doing MS, but even that might not be enought, because believe me people who are less qualified but have personal connections will keep their jobs and prevent more quality workers from replacing them. It's the game of survival now, egos get very edgy and cunning when it comes to game of survival, people of low morale through personal connections will do everything to keep the world from changing, because if the world changes they have to go, so there will be a lot those personal and bitter fights ahead. At the end good karma will win, I'm sure.
He, he, that's for sure, axis is the imaginary line in space around which a planet revolves, so the axis of evil is a revolving priciple of nasty and hstile forces that even if eliminated for one, two years will again revolve into a new phase. So, that way it is a perpetual kind of war of fighting and then fighting more of eveil forces, since they revolve there's no end to their subsequent new phases. So it goes, G.W.B. needs to learn some physics.
I would pretty much agree with that scenario except that it will take a lot shorter time until the next boom, I predict it about 2035-39, then there will be a tremendous boom in technology especially combined with microbiology, new physics and astronomy, health services and travel, etc., a wonder to behold. I mean the future is bright but it will take a lot of effort to clean up the messes of the present system, which is already too old and corrupt to progress further, so it needs to be crashed completely before a new one comes along. The next year 2004 will probably start that process in a big way. What we've seen is nothing! Just a soft prelude so far.
You don't have to lie, just say you were an independent IT consultant, which you were since you have some skills that match that descrption (you know what that is I'm just gessing). Did you do any IT related work at that time even if it was for free? Include those project even if you stayed at home and worked on some problem, it was a project, right? You probably learned something from home-based projects, etc. Not being employed doesn't mean you were not progressing in your chosen discipline or specialization. So, self-employed category is also employment unless someone defines employment as receiving wages for services. But they probably won't ask ab. it. Hey, I'm also unemploled but am not so lucky, I don' get responses from recruiters, etc, so good luck to you.
"Finally I must mention that I have seen more Microsoft hardware this year than Mac hardware or software...." - you're either misinformed or under informed. A friend of mine was just terminated with his "hardware" team from Microsoft, because as their management said they're trying to get out of hardware business including overrated X-box. They're also closing all Web-TV operations.
According to that friend Microsoft has no real vision for the future and just tries to dupe users into constantly upgrading, buying new hardware to sustain new software upgrades and pushing licensing schemas that are more likely to drive users into Linux. Running Longhorn would require expensive hardware upgrades and since economy is not coming back in any visible way people will not spend money to buy more hardware. Microsoft may become a victim of its own strategy that doesn't account for this new economic reality where people and IT shops will have fewer and fewer dollards to spend on M$ products.
"unless they can show exactly when and who put it in the code..." - that's a good point, but also presuming that it is indeed their code. So, there's a chain of co-dependent pieces of evidence needed here: they have to show code is theirs, then that it was taken out of their product, and finally identify someone who and when did it. Because if it was done before their UNIX was acquired from Novell, then Novell should get at least a share of the settlement, if SCO wins the case, which is a big, big IF. Since Novell is not part of the plaintiff then it complicates the matter. But also maybe Novell, or whoever owned UNIX before them released some of that code and if they did there's no point for this lawsuit whatsoever.
It depends on what you what the system to do. For desktop I settled on Xandros Desktop Deluxe 1.0, which is better equipped for desktop use than most distros I've seen or used. For example I can open up my "c:/NTFS" partition with MS Windows and copy files from there wile working in KDE, or can login into Windows domain without a lot of Samba configuration, or have my Photoshop 6.0 installed and running as well as MS Office, which is done with CrossOver Office that comes with Deluxe edition of Xandros, etc., (otherwise it is a separate product that cost around $57 alone - new version 2.0 just came out).
Some people say why should MS apps be used while running Linux desktop. But that's a hard-line attitude and not business-like, because if you got a legal copy of MS Office and don't want to install Windows OS, still you can use it in Linux with CrossOver Office. Since Gimp is too limited for me and I need PowerPoint for my classes and presentations and OpenOffice or Star Office will not do things that I need, I'm happy with that solution of running MS apps on Xandros. Also in that category is Visio - a very useful tool, not to mention that I hope to run AutoCAD as well in the near future.
The only problem I have so far is that Java VM support in Internet Explorer 5.5/6.0 in CO Office has some problems, which is required for some applets to run such as financial streaming stock market data. But definitely, I can live without any rpm major Linux distribution that is out there including their newer version.
"M$ future"? - there's no future for M$, I guess I'm even more radical than you are in the assessment of M$. Here's why. The econ is going bad, people spending less and less money, today's released numbers in new housing construction tell that construction is down by 11%, and that's just a starter, or rather the follow up on the downtrend that started in March 2000 in US economy. The coming war with Iraq will deepen the crisis, by far. The time is coming that most people and businesses won't be able to afford M$ upgrades, licenses, etc. So, M$ empire is doomed, he? Well, not so fast, they will fight to "own" your business by implementing .NET, some say .NOT, but the point is that inevitably M$ won't be needed in the next cycle of soft dev when OpenS will rule the world, right? Well, let's hope so, he he.
Well, thanks, that article is indeed a great read and names things as they are. In addition, while corporate world is trying to cope with new realities of the bear market, Open Source initiatives are better positioned to survive this new and cruel world corporate destruction.
It's because it's Open Source. Is Solaris Open S?, no?, so how come we even argue these apples and oranges nonsense? UNIX is not Open S. because it's vendors want to preserve the business advantage they perceive it has. At the same time Linux is gaining ground despite a capitalist desire for profit and so now Sun M. people say, "well, Linux is such a web of different things, who knows how it'll be maintained?" But the point is that it can be done, and it is done.
"...how about free hardware for all?", hey, are you a communist or something, well it wouldn't be so bad, by the way, it'd complement Linux to have hardware free. "Imagine all the people" having free hardware and software. No more MS sham, no more proprietary OS, all is cool, groovy. I'd like that, rocking. But it'll take some time. In any case, we're heading that way. MS, Sun M., IBM, HP, etc, won't survive this economic nightmare, my view. Don't quote me on that.
So, now we have 2.4.something kernel. What will that do for you? Improve your income, get your bills paid on time? None of those, it'll be just another of those slashdot's announcement. People will do whatever and post myriads meaningless messages. None will talk about things that are relevant and none will do anything to improve failing economy, including IBM that suppose to support Linux but is reluctant to hire those laid off Linux engineers, support engineers, etc. It's all going to nuts! Do you think RHat will survive this downturn? Tell me about it!
Almost every expert on this matter will tell you that h.d. larger than 40GB is an inefficient way of data storage. Why? Because seek/read/write ratios on those drives are slower even if you increase RPMs (rotational speed). For fast access needs and I/O operations smaller drives are better, not to mention that when a larger h.d. fails it is moree costly to change it that a smaller drive. Larger drive cost more, right? It's the selling that drives the capacity. But this is one of those crazy things that comapanies like to propage to increase its sales, "I did this, I did that". I don't think anyone cares about it anymore.
The difference with SuSE is that while they closed or almost closed all US operations, they still can release English distro of their own. On the other hand the US Turbo was an independent business entity from its Asia operations. They had the same name but separate financing, etc. That became the fact over a year ago, which was not widely publicized. Since US Turbo run out of cash it couldn't be helped by its Asian folks anymore. That "ingenious" plan was implemented under the current CEO Ly-Huong Pham, who took over after Paul Thomas. So, most probably, we won't see English based Turbo software in a while. Yet you can say Turbolinux brand will survive in Asia, so it isn't entirely gone. Asian Turbolinux distro is more desktop oriented while US Turbo was into servers and mainframes.
Apparently you have some bigger bone to grind with LinuxGram, by saying that "they completely and deliberately missed everything" you aren't proving anything, it's just your opinion. So, what did they miss by the way? That US Turbo is going under? That's the fact even if some leftovers could survive another year.
Since the beginning of the last year, when Ly Huong Pham took over as the CEO at Turbolinux Inc., there's nothing but problems for that company. Some of the problems were created before she became the head, but on the other hand whatever was left was mismanaged, in my opinion. She didn't react fast enough to the changing reality of the broader global market while let the Asia-Pacific operations in China, Korea and Japon to create their own independent business entities. Therefore, when the US division in Brisbane, CA, became short of cash there was no way to rescue it by reallocating assets from Asia. As it turned out it was the Asian divisions that had better cash flow than the US' Turbo. But she herself created this situation in the first place. When she went to Korea and talked to Samsung's managers everyone admired her intelligence. But that meant really nothing business wise. It was a PR on-the-road show.
The other point is that in the latest disclaimer by the Turbo's CEO on Linuxtoday.com, she was "...blaming the reorganization on the withdrawal of a still unidentified investor from a round of funding." What kind of round finding?, they already had III rounds of funding of which nothing is left. Now, when someone pulls out from the next round of funding and that means the new round of layoffs (called "reorganization") what does that say about the company's health? It means they're so strapped for cash that even one investor means making it or else. It's a dire straits situation. So, let Ly Huong Pham better stop deluding other people that Turbolinux Inc. in the US can survive, I wouldn't mind if she stepped down altogether, because there's no basis to show that her reign will do any good.
They had this last layoffs at Turbo from what was left from the last year's layoffs, what was left from the prev. y's layoffs, etc. So, when the Turbo's current CEO Ly Huang Pham says they're still surviving how credible that is? What is surviving?, few managers who mismanaged their resources? Obviously, in the series of layoffs managers were able to keep their positions, some left on their own, but the bottom line is that managers had no credible buss model for that company in the time like this, the only solution they have is to layoff more people. So, LinuxGram's reporting that Turbolinux is going under is not far from the truth even if they missed something.
Almost to date a year ago when I got my pink slip from US Turbolinux Inc. there were only 4-6 software engineers left, 3 people in pre-sale, 3-4 marketing, just one in tech support(!) and say 4 in QA, not counting HR, Finance, and management. So, that was 30-40 head count and also 12-15 in TurboLabs. Then there were more layoffs after I left in QA, now another "restructuring"? What would that mean? Ly-Huang Pham got laid off? That would be perhaps the most appropriate thing to do since when she became the CEO things go down and down again for them, all that happened on her watch.
The reason you think that way is that Turbo focused on server rather than desktop Linux. They had several good server products including IA64, IMB's eServer Linux for mainframes, better than Red Hat's, in my opinion. SuSE was the other solid player in that space. When RH finally released their GA S/390 Linux it had a lot of problems, still IBM went with RH and SuSE as the second. IBM to some extent played a role in the demise of Turbo, in my opinion, because it didn't reliably back up Turbo as its Buss. Partner. The other part was mismanagement of financial reserves Turbo had in the amount of over $15ml only 1.5yr ago. When you rent two almost empty huge building floors in the Bay Area and keep paying big rentals, what do you expect of you cash reservers to become? It was 100% waste, the other was failed merger with Linuxcare that took several $mls as well.
There's nothing like Linux, didn't you notice yet? It's not software, it's not different coding phylosophy, it's the free human spirit. Nothing can kill that because it is truly free enterprise that has no bounds.
Indeed, in my opinion too, or though not an IBM's employee, Turbo had good eServer products and was ahead by far of RedHat in that regard. That was never noticed by the mainstream Linux pros though, because everyone on Slashdot is talking Linux desktop. So, it is sad that Turbo might be gone now. But IBM made its decission of supporting RedHat despite the fact that other Linux distros were beter for eServer. That was a mistake in my view becuase it create the perceprion that RedHat is the only strong Linux distro. Quantity came before qaulity, that may hunt IBM in the long run.
Well, good for him, he's in an abysmal no-land right now, right?
That's correct, they were never a public company and cash reservs that they had when I joyned them at end the end of 2000 was $30ml. In less than a year that became just $5 after the failed merger with Linuxcare (they had to pay the laweyrs' fees in several millions for that failed attempt). Since venture capital dried up in this kind of bear market they have no way of keeping the business going. That will impact to some extent companies such as IBM, because Turbo had several server products for their eServer. IBM helped SuSE In a similar situation, but IBM is having its own difficulties.
I agree, several server products were very good actually, say EnFuzion, ClusterServer, PowerCockpit. I worked for them too. The way I see it is that the upper management was not able to react fast enought to the changing market conditions. Instead of saving and constrain they kept spending $ on extra unoccupied floor rental, failed Linuxcare merger, and thir managers destroyed and outsourced their tech support, so there was no violable incentive to buy their even good products.