SCO should reveal the problem, we'll fix it
on
SCO To Show Copied Code
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Most lawsuits start with a cease and desist letter. SCO needed to give us, the Linux community, the opportunity to see where the problems lay and give us the opportunity to remedy it. If Linux kernel source code really does include source from Unix, then it should be easy enough to rewrite those parts of the source.
Instead, SCO sends out their own Caldera customers warnings that they may be sued by SCO for using Linux. As a Unix instructor at a college, it will be years before I stop discussing the SCO case in class. Every student that comes out of my program will likely go out of their way to use operating systems that do not bear the SCO name.
SCO will not survive this. It is absurd for a company to piss off the community that it sees as it's customer base. Maybe they should spend more time fixing their antiquated and problem ridden SCO Unix OS rather than follow the RIAA's poor example.
I have a lot of respect for the work that Rasterman has done for the Linux desktop over the years. I'm an avid Enlightenment user. I also see his point that users just don't have the wealth of programs available to them for Linux as is available for Windows. Unfortunately, Rasterman forgot about the business world.
As Microsoft sends out love letters asking their customers to audit themselves, many big companies are viewing Linux as a way to keep costs down, not just server side, but client side as well. At a savings of $200 per desktop, it doesn't take an economics degree to see Linux is a smart choice for the desktop. Software needs? Most business need database access and office productivity software. Web browsers using forms on PHP, ASP, JSP, etc provide the access to a database, and OpenOffice provides everything else. No license fees, no copyright hasles, and minor learning curves. Imagine the time and money IT departments will save just by minimizing the software inventory they will have keep.
I think we've debated the Linux vs Microsoft and which is better to death. I'm just here to say that Linux is an acceptable OS on the corporate destop, Linux is exponentially growing on the desktop in the business sector, and companies will save themselves the stress of a software license audit.
Rasterman is right, the average person at home will continue to use Microsoft products. We don't have a printshop for Linux, or a virtual barbie dress up program. That's cool. Windows works just fine for the home user who doesn't mind a restart a couple of times a day. But Linux is slowly becoming the corporate savior for their licensing griefs.
If anything, the *nix people don't trust Microsoft's.net plan, and no one should. No one company should control that much information about individuals. People's mistrust of.net will stop the *nix people from using Gnome. It's almost like Miguel is trying to bring Microsoft to the *nix people even though he knows we absolutely hate Microsoft's stradegies. Too bad, Gnome 1.4 was kind of nice. I guess I'll be using XFCE or Enlightenment.
Slashdot Mirror
Most lawsuits start with a cease and desist letter. SCO needed to give us, the Linux community, the opportunity to see where the problems lay and give us the opportunity to remedy it. If Linux kernel source code really does include source from Unix, then it should be easy enough to rewrite those parts of the source.
Instead, SCO sends out their own Caldera customers warnings that they may be sued by SCO for using Linux. As a Unix instructor at a college, it will be years before I stop discussing the SCO case in class. Every student that comes out of my program will likely go out of their way to use operating systems that do not bear the SCO name.
SCO will not survive this. It is absurd for a company to piss off the community that it sees as it's customer base. Maybe they should spend more time fixing their antiquated and problem ridden SCO Unix OS rather than follow the RIAA's poor example.
I have a lot of respect for the work that Rasterman has done for the Linux desktop over the years. I'm an avid Enlightenment user. I also see his point that users just don't have the wealth of programs available to them for Linux as is available for Windows. Unfortunately, Rasterman forgot about the business world.
As Microsoft sends out love letters asking their customers to audit themselves, many big companies are viewing Linux as a way to keep costs down, not just server side, but client side as well. At a savings of $200 per desktop, it doesn't take an economics degree to see Linux is a smart choice for the desktop. Software needs? Most business need database access and office productivity software. Web browsers using forms on PHP, ASP, JSP, etc provide the access to a database, and OpenOffice provides everything else. No license fees, no copyright hasles, and minor learning curves. Imagine the time and money IT departments will save just by minimizing the software inventory they will have keep.
I think we've debated the Linux vs Microsoft and which is better to death. I'm just here to say that Linux is an acceptable OS on the corporate destop, Linux is exponentially growing on the desktop in the business sector, and companies will save themselves the stress of a software license audit.
Rasterman is right, the average person at home will continue to use Microsoft products. We don't have a printshop for Linux, or a virtual barbie dress up program. That's cool. Windows works just fine for the home user who doesn't mind a restart a couple of times a day. But Linux is slowly becoming the corporate savior for their licensing griefs.
If anything, the *nix people don't trust Microsoft's .net plan, and no one should. No one company should control that much information about individuals. People's mistrust of .net will stop the *nix people from using Gnome. It's almost like Miguel is trying to bring Microsoft to the *nix people even though he knows we absolutely hate Microsoft's stradegies. Too bad, Gnome 1.4 was kind of nice. I guess I'll be using XFCE or Enlightenment.
-Feddman