Let OSDL buy SCO, with the money from SGI and IBM, then they can come after Microsoft and sue them for those alleged infringements mentioned earlier here at/.
Even if it may be fun with Microsoft bashing, you forget something more serious and really, really scary - this may delay the lastet and greatest ATi and nVidia hardware. So, quit whining and try to help those poor buggers instead.
Wheee, I thought Fresco (fka Berlin) had had trouble.;)
While this may be good news for Cairo) and Fresco, in giving them more time, it may also indicate something else, that Microsoft found out that the hardware is not and will not be good enough (even if I doubt that idea).
This is essentially untrue. Accepting vector graphics as the default in computers may alter our perception of what is eye candy completely. As far as I'm concerned the Fresco/Berlin project was the right way already several years ago. Today, the hardware has caught up and there is nothing to be lost in user space with vector graphics everywhere.
In fact, we have no idea what kind of possibilities may open up here. If we're unlucky, yes, it might be a can of worms...;)
Because, in the software industry the history has shown (especially via Microsoft) the first winner takes it all, leaving that winner with disproportionate advantages versus any competing idea.
Maybe I'm wrong here, but didn't HP "sell" them that machine, with that OS? From what I understood, the system was not developed by "their-lonesome-selves". Or am I "splitting hairs"? Really, how is PNNL + HP = inhouse? Yes, I sure hope I am missing something essential here.
In light of the SCO case, I wonder if they have released the source for the OS for that machine, as required by the GPL. This may be a case to test HP's stand in that case.
Here is a list of the most recent transactions by that group, and presented here:
06.20.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP Sell 5,000 $11.08 - $11.10 06.25.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SREXVP NA 5,000 $10.00 - $0.00 07.08.2003 Bench, Robert K. CFO NA 7,000 $10.91 - $11.12 07.08.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $10.90 - $10.95 07.09.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP Sell 5,000 $11.76 - $11.81 07.09.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP NA 5,000 $11.76 - $11.81 07.11.2003 Olson, Michael P VP NA 8,000 $10.40 - $10.99 07.14.2003 Wilson, Michael SRVP NA 6,000 $0.66 - $0.00 07.14.2003 Wilson, Michael SRVP Sell 6,000 $10.77 - $10.87 07.15.2003 Wilson, Michael Sean SRVP Sell 6,000 $10.66 - $10.80 07.15.2003 Wilson, Michael Sean SRVP NA 6,000 $0.66 - $0.00 07.22.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 20,000 $12.91 - $13.20 07.23.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP NA 5,000 $13.30 - $13.44 07.30.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $12.80 - $12.81 08.05.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $12.56 - $12.57 08.08.2003 Bench, Robert K. CFO NA 7,000 $10.90 - $0.00
"However if Alan wants to break into upper management or start his own company then all his l337 kernel hacking skills aren't worth a hill of beans compared to the knowledge he could get from an MBA and the doors it opens. "
But, from what I've learnt, he better get a major haircut before those doors are closed.;)
This link, while wildly semi-ontopic, http://www.sco.com/2003forum/sponsors.html, should give a fairly decent overview of the support the SCO Forum 2003 currently has. For now it contains the following info:
"Document Not Found
To find the document you're looking for, please see our company sitemap or use the following search: [snip]
If you're having problems with a broken link, send us your e-mail and we'll find the page for you."
In other news, and possibly as a response to Apple shipping the G5, AMD skyrockets on the financial market; apparently traders know something Steve Jobs doesn't. More than 10% in a day, wheeew; looks like 1999.
Caldera/SCO's plans from year 2000 were described in an October 2000 article at LinuxToday:
Drew Spencer, Caldera's chief technology officer, and the supplier's legal department were now looking at the ramifications of licensing the Unix kernel and UnixWare personality under a GNU General Public Licence - one of several ways to license open source software.
This means that the source code would be made available to the open source community for free to allow them to tinker with it, but that any changes would have to be handed back so that others can benefit from them.
As a result, the aim is to encourage kernel and application developers to work on the code and to "give them added insight into the way the OS works".
Original equipment manufactures, such as IBM and Hewlett Packard, would still have to pay a fee to license the SVR5 Unix kernel source code, however, if they wish it to remain the basis of their own commercial iterations of Unix."
Exciting reading as it vividly predicts what is actually happening today. Some remarks seem unexpected in hindsight and indicated that "only one of the kernels would remain within the next 18 months.":
"It will not be a two kernel situation into the future. As the Linux kernel develops and the Unix kernel is open sourced, the solution will be whichever works the best. It will be the survival of the fittest. People are not doing a lot of development on the Unix kernel these days because people see Linux as exciting and the future."
Edgie Donakey, Caldera's vice president and chief of staff
I do not wonder how IBM could take such public claims as a go-ahead from Caldera/SCO; these remarks seem very clear to me, as they come from the vice president.
Yes, but, if I understood what SCO's argument - IBM's patches are directly based upon SCO's own code.
They (IBM) used SCO's code, modified it, and re-distributed it illegally to people who accepted it in good faith. IBM's modifications are IBM's, but the underlying code still belong to SCO, if I get SCO's argument correctly.
Possibly, someone at IBM made a blunder, if true; after all, one can't blame SCO, if this interpretation is true, for not recognising and (in good faith) redistributing modified code the minute it arrives.
Still, why did they still deliver GPL'd code, several weeks after the suit, among many many other questionable actions mentioned else-/everywhere?! A multibillion dollar ignorance?! Unlikely. In my view, some lawyer believed in his chance here, and hyped SCO's chances to improportionally good proportions; hence, we have a battle.
Please forgive me for being vague, but there is a statement along the line of the previous poster, somewhere in the kernel developers mailing list, from some bitter IBM kernel developer. He had delivered not only some patch, but also an entire kernel based on his work. Then, some woman (IIRC) from the legal dept at IBM contacted him effectively saying - Hey, we are NOT delivering a distro.
I don't remember who/when or what it was, but, it was within the last two/three years. I wish I could be more helpful here; I was a keen reader of the Kernel Traffic at the time where I may have read it. Anyhow, it does make sense in that IBM has been very aware of the risks of delivering a distro.
I hope someone out there has a better memory than I.
Why?! There was no sarcasm anywhere. Indeed my pointer was to a very relevant side-affair of the topic: the sci-fi as related to 'true' sci-fi. Therefore, their homepage address was indeed, and still is the best I've seen in years.
Yes I'm such a whiner.;)
* They have StarOffice, based on the GPL'd OpenOffice; they have a great future. *Java (that pesky little language) was doomed too but still hangs around, much like Basic, Pascal and Visual Basic *Solaris still has an unbeaten reputation for carrier grade quality in telecom compared to Linux, yet... *They have their own hardware too, even if Opterons...
SUN is better than its reputation here, I believe.
Slashdot Mirror
Let OSDL buy SCO, with the money from SGI and IBM, then they can come after Microsoft and sue them for those alleged infringements mentioned earlier here at /.
;)
Just a joke
"Hey, another reason NOT to upgrade to the new version!"
New version of what? The Microsoft or the OpenOffice?
If OpenOffice, is there something wrong with it? Please, tell me, why shouldn't I upgrade?!
Even if it may be fun with Microsoft bashing, you forget something more serious and really, really scary - this may delay the lastet and greatest ATi and nVidia hardware. So, quit whining and try to help those poor buggers instead.
Wheee, I thought Fresco (fka Berlin) had had trouble. ;)
While this may be good news for Cairo) and Fresco, in giving them more time, it may also indicate something else, that Microsoft found out that the hardware is not and will not be good enough (even if I doubt that idea).
Grey and orange!
"All" trendy companies of 1999 had sleek logos in grey and orange (oh, yes, I used to work for one of those...).
"right future for the eye candy of an X desktop"
;)
This is essentially untrue. Accepting vector graphics as the default in computers may alter our perception of what is eye candy completely. As far as I'm concerned the Fresco/Berlin project was the right way already several years ago. Today, the hardware has caught up and there is nothing to be lost in user space with vector graphics everywhere.
In fact, we have no idea what kind of possibilities may open up here. If we're unlucky, yes, it might be a can of worms...
Because, in the software industry the history has shown (especially via Microsoft) the first winner takes it all, leaving that winner with disproportionate advantages versus any competing idea.
I just read Rob and Eric's long, well-written rebuttal to SCO's complaint but missed any remarks from them on paragraph 141.
To me, it seemed too important to be not commented. Has it been commented upon since?
Maybe I'm wrong here, but didn't HP "sell" them that machine, with that OS? From what I understood, the system was not developed by "their-lonesome-selves". Or am I "splitting hairs"? Really, how is PNNL + HP = inhouse? Yes, I sure hope I am missing something essential here.
In light of the SCO case, I wonder if they have released the source for the OS for that machine, as required by the GPL. This may be a case to test HP's stand in that case.
This should have been a poll. Now, it just leads to endless ramblings.
Here is a list of the insiders of SCO.
Here is a list of the most recent transactions by that group, and presented here:
06.20.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP Sell 5,000 $11.08 - $11.10
06.25.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SREXVP NA 5,000 $10.00 - $0.00
07.08.2003 Bench, Robert K. CFO NA 7,000 $10.91 - $11.12
07.08.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $10.90 - $10.95
07.09.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP Sell 5,000 $11.76 - $11.81
07.09.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP NA 5,000 $11.76 - $11.81
07.11.2003 Olson, Michael P VP NA 8,000 $10.40 - $10.99
07.14.2003 Wilson, Michael SRVP NA 6,000 $0.66 - $0.00
07.14.2003 Wilson, Michael SRVP Sell 6,000 $10.77 - $10.87
07.15.2003 Wilson, Michael Sean SRVP Sell 6,000 $10.66 - $10.80
07.15.2003 Wilson, Michael Sean SRVP NA 6,000 $0.66 - $0.00
07.22.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 20,000 $12.91 - $13.20
07.23.2003 Hunsaker, Jeff F. VP NA 5,000 $13.30 - $13.44
07.30.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $12.80 - $12.81
08.05.2003 Broughton, Reginald C. SRVP NA 5,000 $12.56 - $12.57
08.08.2003 Bench, Robert K. CFO NA 7,000 $10.90 - $0.00
"the vital 'Vi or Emacs?' question" Huh? The question of today for anyone running for being a governor is - SCO or IBM?
"However if Alan wants to break into upper management or start his own company then all his l337 kernel hacking skills aren't worth a hill of beans compared to the knowledge he could get from an MBA and the doors it opens. "
;)
But, from what I've learnt, he better get a major haircut before those doors are closed.
This link, while wildly semi-ontopic, http://www.sco.com/2003forum/sponsors.html, should give a fairly decent overview of the support the SCO Forum 2003 currently has. For now it contains the following info:
"Document Not Found
To find the document you're looking for, please see our company sitemap or use the following search: [snip]
If you're having problems with a broken link, send us your e-mail and we'll find the page for you."
Whatever, it does not ring any bells searching the kernel list either.
In a paranoid world... Did patch@hp.com ever exist?
Is there a connection with the compromisation of the FSF databases?! Wheeew...
In other news, and possibly as a response to Apple shipping the G5, AMD skyrockets on the financial market; apparently traders know something Steve Jobs doesn't. More than 10% in a day, wheeew; looks like 1999.
"Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM"
;)
Huh? You haven't heard of SCO, have you?
Caldera/SCO's plans from year 2000 were described in an October 2000 article at LinuxToday:
Drew Spencer, Caldera's chief technology officer, and the supplier's legal department were now looking at the ramifications of licensing the Unix kernel and UnixWare personality under a GNU General Public Licence - one of several ways to license open source software.
This means that the source code would be made available to the open source community for free to allow them to tinker with it, but that any changes would have to be handed back so that others can benefit from them.
As a result, the aim is to encourage kernel and application developers to work on the code and to "give them added insight into the way the OS works".
Original equipment manufactures, such as IBM and Hewlett Packard, would still have to pay a fee to license the SVR5 Unix kernel source code, however, if they wish it to remain the basis of their own commercial iterations of Unix."
Make sure you see the accompanying newsgroup talkbacks at comp.unix.unixware.misc via this juicy link.
Exciting reading as it vividly predicts what is actually happening today. Some remarks seem unexpected in hindsight and indicated that "only one of the kernels would remain within the next 18 months.":
"It will not be a two kernel situation into the future. As the Linux kernel develops and the Unix kernel is open sourced, the solution will be whichever works the best. It will be the survival of the fittest. People are not doing a lot of development on the Unix kernel these days because people see Linux as exciting and the future."
Edgie Donakey, Caldera's vice president and chief of staff
I do not wonder how IBM could take such public claims as a go-ahead from Caldera/SCO; these remarks seem very clear to me, as they come from the vice president.
Yes, but, if I understood what SCO's argument - IBM's patches are directly based upon SCO's own code.
They (IBM) used SCO's code, modified it, and re-distributed it illegally to people who accepted it in good faith. IBM's modifications are IBM's, but the underlying code still belong to SCO, if I get SCO's argument correctly.
Possibly, someone at IBM made a blunder, if true; after all, one can't blame SCO, if this interpretation is true, for not recognising and (in good faith) redistributing modified code the minute it arrives. Still, why did they still deliver GPL'd code, several weeks after the suit, among many many other questionable actions mentioned else-/everywhere?! A multibillion dollar ignorance?! Unlikely. In my view, some lawyer believed in his chance here, and hyped SCO's chances to improportionally good proportions; hence, we have a battle.
Please forgive me for being vague, but there is a statement along the line of the previous poster, somewhere in the kernel developers mailing list, from some bitter IBM kernel developer. He had delivered not only some patch, but also an entire kernel based on his work. Then, some woman (IIRC) from the legal dept at IBM contacted him effectively saying - Hey, we are NOT delivering a distro.
I don't remember who/when or what it was, but, it was within the last two/three years. I wish I could be more helpful here; I was a keen reader of the Kernel Traffic at the time where I may have read it. Anyhow, it does make sense in that IBM has been very aware of the risks of delivering a distro.
I hope someone out there has a better memory than I.
What?! For now I'm being "-1, Offtopic". Why?!
;)
Why?! There was no sarcasm anywhere. Indeed my pointer was to a very relevant side-affair of the topic: the sci-fi as related to 'true' sci-fi. Therefore, their homepage address was indeed, and still is the best I've seen in years. Yes I'm such a whiner.
At times I wish I promote abuse; lengthier, girth, feel me, squeek, underneath me...
...belt.
Feel my waist...
Check out their adress!!! http://www.sci.fi SCI-FI !!!! Best I've seen in years!
"I wonder if this is too late for Sun"
Waddya mean?
* They have StarOffice, based on the GPL'd OpenOffice; they have a great future.
*Java (that pesky little language) was doomed too but still hangs around, much like Basic, Pascal and Visual Basic
*Solaris still has an unbeaten reputation for carrier grade quality in telecom compared to Linux, yet...
*They have their own hardware too, even if Opterons...
SUN is better than its reputation here, I believe.