According to their website, "SCO is the owner of the UNIX Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back 1969, when the UNIX System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the patents, copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX System licenses to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value."
'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.'
Which is why we use Linux to host our website.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=off&mo de_w=on&site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sco.com&submit=Exami ne
Just because one OSS solution has a projected higher TCO than a CSS doesn't mean that all OSS solutions have a higher TCO. If the OSS solution you have chosen is modular, more than likely you can hire employees who can be trained to support and maintain the code long after all other support is available. However, if your software is supposed to provide solutions to complex mathematical equations few people can solve don't assume cheap programmers will be available to maintain the code.
My favorite on the NT servers was a popup explainging that the Dr. Watson process had generated a Dr. Watson error. If the system hadn't frozen I would have screen-capped that bad boy.
Also, twice when using Veritas Backup Exec NT 7.3 I received a warning error messages stating that there were over 1 billion administrators currently connected to the system, so I should be careful making changes. I wasn't aware Backup Exec was so popular.
So you've never installed Winnt 3.1/3.5/4.0/Win2K/XP? The first portion of the install for these is text based. So, anyone who has installed any version of Winnt should be comfortable with the installation interface for Debian, Libranet and any other distribution with an ncurses based text install.
Gui is not where it is at, especially if you want to install a headless server. But you can ignore me. I just teach network administrators how to use this stuff.
Dell is the #1 or #2 PC supplier in the world. They have a tremendous amount of power with all of their suppliers. If they really didn't want to agree to this they didn't have to. They simply could have said NO and Microsoft would have changed their agreement. They don't want to risk another PC vendor promoting and improving Linux like IBM has done.
If Dell agreed to this it is because they didn't believe the fight was worth it. They have made a lot of statements to the fact that they aren't making any money off Linux sales so it makes sense that they would choose to do this.
If the Linux community wants the big PC vendors to start supporting Linux and making agreements that don't harm the Linux community they need to start making it apparent to Dell. The next time your company is looking to upgrade its desktops contact Dell and request a quote for their standard business desktop with Linux preinstalled. When they point out that only certain systems are available inform them that you know for fact that Redhat/Mandrake/Debian/Etc. installs perfectly on the Optiplex you want and that you will be taking your business to another PC vendor that supports MS. If Dell wants your business they will meet your needs, and their policies towards restrictive Microsoft licenses will change.
Slashdot Mirror
According to their website, "SCO is the owner of the UNIX Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back 1969, when the UNIX System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the patents, copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX System licenses to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value."
http://www.sco.com/scosource/
Where can I find a screener of Reloaded?
emerge kde mozilla netscape-flash mplayer-plugin openoffice xmms ogle
A fairly complete desktop install done with one command. How's that for convenient?
If you don't want people visiting your site why would you create it in the first place?
'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.'
Which is why we use Linux to host our website. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=off&mJust because one OSS solution has a projected higher TCO than a CSS doesn't mean that all OSS solutions have a higher TCO. If the OSS solution you have chosen is modular, more than likely you can hire employees who can be trained to support and maintain the code long after all other support is available. However, if your software is supposed to provide solutions to complex mathematical equations few people can solve don't assume cheap programmers will be available to maintain the code.
My favorite on the NT servers was a popup explainging that the Dr. Watson process had generated a Dr. Watson error. If the system hadn't frozen I would have screen-capped that bad boy.
Also, twice when using Veritas Backup Exec NT 7.3 I received a warning error messages stating that there were over 1 billion administrators currently connected to the system, so I should be careful making changes. I wasn't aware Backup Exec was so popular.
So you've never installed Winnt 3.1/3.5/4.0/Win2K/XP? The first portion of the install for these is text based. So, anyone who has installed any version of Winnt should be comfortable with the installation interface for Debian, Libranet and any other distribution with an ncurses based text install.
Gui is not where it is at, especially if you want to install a headless server. But you can ignore me. I just teach network administrators how to use this stuff.
Who needs an exploit to crash a Windows server?
"novel"??
Apt-get
Emerge
URPMI
RPM
It's not even novel that they "embraced" the idea and called it their own - they "embraced" that idea from M$.
Dell is the #1 or #2 PC supplier in the world. They have a tremendous amount of power with all of their suppliers. If they really didn't want to agree to this they didn't have to. They simply could have said NO and Microsoft would have changed their agreement. They don't want to risk another PC vendor promoting and improving Linux like IBM has done.
If Dell agreed to this it is because they didn't believe the fight was worth it. They have made a lot of statements to the fact that they aren't making any money off Linux sales so it makes sense that they would choose to do this.
If the Linux community wants the big PC vendors to start supporting Linux and making agreements that don't harm the Linux community they need to start making it apparent to Dell. The next time your company is looking to upgrade its desktops contact Dell and request a quote for their standard business desktop with Linux preinstalled. When they point out that only certain systems are available inform them that you know for fact that Redhat/Mandrake/Debian/Etc. installs perfectly on the Optiplex you want and that you will be taking your business to another PC vendor that supports MS. If Dell wants your business they will meet your needs, and their policies towards restrictive Microsoft licenses will change.