The article has a quote where Baystar "told NewsForge Thursday that it doesn't believe SCO's senior management is experienced enough in IT litigation to fully reap the financial benefits from the company's intellectual property." The problem is, SCO doesn't really own any IP from what I have seen thus far.
They do not own the copyrights to the Unix source code, as that was explicitly exempted in the agreement between Novel and old-SCO. They do not own the specifications for Unix, which is now a public standard known as Posix. They do not even own the Unix trademark, which is owned by the Open Group.
It seems to me that all they really own is the abililty to license the Unix code that belongs to Novell, which is why they have to pay Novell a portition of the licensing fees they collect. The fact that Novell has the ability to override licensing decisions made by SCO (such as trying to void IBM's license in regards to AIX) indicates to me who is really in charge.
Personally, I hope Baystar suffers a huge loss for their decision to back such a stupid lawsuit.
"new versions of Windows XP actually try to hide the Administrator user"
That is only in Windows XP Home. And you can reach the administrator account if you boot XP Home into safe mode. XP Pro doesn't try to hide the administrator account.
I hope that someone moderates you up because you are correct, IMHO.
And speaking of Microsoft, I read recently that they are spreading FUD to the effect that "No one stands behind Linux, unlike Windows". I just had to laugh, considering that all Microsoft really warranties is the media their software is distributed on.
"So, when it comes down to it, the bottom line question is, do you trust Google to do what they say they're going to do? "
No, I do not. Why?
1. Google can probably alter the deal at any time without your consent.
2. Once a company goes public, they are no longer trustworthy in my opinion. We need look no further then SCO to see what can happen once a company becomes publically traded (Caldera).
Sadly, what is ethical and what is legal are often two different things.
Spam is not that hard to deal with, as filters are pretty accurate, but for them to work I still have to actually download the messages; an annoying prospect.
My solution was to switch to IMAP and just download the message headers. This allows me to delete the spam messages without downloading the whole email, plus I have the added benefit of being able to read my email from anywhere.
When I first heard about GMail, it sounded great. But as more time goes by and the terms of service become known, it seems to me that GMail could be a problematic service. It would also seem to me that Google would try to use e-mail to build profiles of its users, which could eventually fall into the hands third parties. (Even if Google doesn't intend for that to happen right now, once it is a publically traded company things could change.)
So for right now, I would have to say no thank you.
While in the Navy, I was stationed in Maryland. Being a Florida resident, I did not have to file a state income tax, only a federal one. But shortly after filing a federal tax return with a Maryland return address, the state of Maryland sent me a letter, seeking state income tax. I told them I was a Florida resident in the military and that was enough to end to situation.
You're right. When my.Mac account comes due in May, I am going to let it expire.
I have switched to Geekmail.cc, who specializes in IMAP accounts. They let me filter my IMAP mail on the server side using Procmail. They also allow me suck mail from my other POP3 accounts using Fetchmail. And finally, they give me authenticated SMTP server of ports 25 and 2525, which means I can send mail out no matter where I am.
It's $40.00 a year with 200MB of storage and it works for me. (I don't work for them, BTW. I am just a customer.)
I am a Mac OS X user and I have to say that I think that the UI of Gnome is appealing. If I was still using NetBSD, I would probably run it. (Hell, maybe I'll install YellowDog Linux and give it a try.)
I read through the motion and, although IANAL, I thought it was well reasoned and really layed out everything the way it is, especially SCO's hypocrisy. It was also kind of cool to see the term "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" used several times. (They did spell it out, suggesting that they didn't think the judge would know what FUD means).
I have a page that lists all revision of Mac OS X (client) since the public beta. I created it because I periodically save screenshots and I couldn't always remember which OS revision the screenshot was created with.
Anyway, you can access it at http://www.goo.cc/macosx.html
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't want to have the computer slicked immediately, install a bunch of porn on it. That will keep them too busy to reinstall the OS!
I am going to keep it real just go with the Unix cal and calendar commands. Real nice and lightweight.
At least SCO had developers at one time. Some companies out there just license a patent just so that can sue.
I think that I am going to rush out and trademark "BSD Is Dying", that way I prevent usage of that term on troll /. posts! Patent office, here I come!
The article has a quote where Baystar "told NewsForge Thursday that it doesn't believe SCO's senior management is experienced enough in IT litigation to fully reap the financial benefits from the company's intellectual property." The problem is, SCO doesn't really own any IP from what I have seen thus far.
They do not own the copyrights to the Unix source code, as that was explicitly exempted in the agreement between Novel and old-SCO. They do not own the specifications for Unix, which is now a public standard known as Posix. They do not even own the Unix trademark, which is owned by the Open Group.
It seems to me that all they really own is the abililty to license the Unix code that belongs to Novell, which is why they have to pay Novell a portition of the licensing fees they collect. The fact that Novell has the ability to override licensing decisions made by SCO (such as trying to void IBM's license in regards to AIX) indicates to me who is really in charge.
Personally, I hope Baystar suffers a huge loss for their decision to back such a stupid lawsuit.
"new versions of Windows XP actually try to hide the Administrator user"
That is only in Windows XP Home. And you can reach the administrator account if you boot XP Home into safe mode. XP Pro doesn't try to hide the administrator account.
"Spymac is already in business"
So was Google.
Yeah, it really ought to be "the Owner of a UNIX Operating System." since anything the Open Groups deems to be Unix IS Unix.
I hope that someone moderates you up because you are correct, IMHO.
And speaking of Microsoft, I read recently that they are spreading FUD to the effect that "No one stands behind Linux, unlike Windows". I just had to laugh, considering that all Microsoft really warranties is the media their software is distributed on.
Personally, I would have called it Linnovate, since MS loves the word innovate.
"So, when it comes down to it, the bottom line question is, do you trust Google to do what they say they're going to do? "
No, I do not. Why?
1. Google can probably alter the deal at any time without your consent.
2. Once a company goes public, they are no longer trustworthy in my opinion. We need look no further then SCO to see what can happen once a company becomes publically traded (Caldera).
Sadly, what is ethical and what is legal are often two different things.
It seems like everyday, Sun has some new scheme or business plan. I'm sorry but they strike me as being very inconsistant.
Spam is not that hard to deal with, as filters are pretty accurate, but for them to work I still have to actually download the messages; an annoying prospect.
My solution was to switch to IMAP and just download the message headers. This allows me to delete the spam messages without downloading the whole email, plus I have the added benefit of being able to read my email from anywhere.
When I first heard about GMail, it sounded great. But as more time goes by and the terms of service become known, it seems to me that GMail could be a problematic service. It would also seem to me that Google would try to use e-mail to build profiles of its users, which could eventually fall into the hands third parties. (Even if Google doesn't intend for that to happen right now, once it is a publically traded company things could change.)
So for right now, I would have to say no thank you.
While in the Navy, I was stationed in Maryland. Being a Florida resident, I did not have to file a state income tax, only a federal one. But shortly after filing a federal tax return with a Maryland return address, the state of Maryland sent me a letter, seeking state income tax. I told them I was a Florida resident in the military and that was enough to end to situation.
When did this happen? 1994.
Does SUSE still make a PowerPC version of their OS? I seem to remember one being announced but I didn't see it in their online store.
You're right. When my .Mac account comes due in May, I am going to let it expire.
I have switched to Geekmail.cc, who specializes in IMAP accounts. They let me filter my IMAP mail on the server side using Procmail. They also allow me suck mail from my other POP3 accounts using Fetchmail. And finally, they give me authenticated SMTP server of ports 25 and 2525, which means I can send mail out no matter where I am.
It's $40.00 a year with 200MB of storage and it works for me. (I don't work for them, BTW. I am just a customer.)
That wouldn't be really slow?
I am a Mac OS X user and I have to say that I think that the UI of Gnome is appealing. If I was still using NetBSD, I would probably run it. (Hell, maybe I'll install YellowDog Linux and give it a try.)
I read through the motion and, although IANAL, I thought it was well reasoned and really layed out everything the way it is, especially SCO's hypocrisy. It was also kind of cool to see the term "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" used several times. (They did spell it out, suggesting that they didn't think the judge would know what FUD means).
but it is still wrong to distribute copyrighted material that you have no rights to.
Wouldn't they have to pay a royalty to Microsoft due to the patents on Fat32 in embedded devices?
BTW, it's too bad Unsanity no longer produces Mint Audio. It was a nice little audio player.
The Apple Press Release states the 23rd of August. You can see it at Apple's PR Page
I have a page that lists all revision of Mac OS X (client) since the public beta. I created it because I periodically save screenshots and I couldn't always remember which OS revision the screenshot was created with.
Anyway, you can access it at http://www.goo.cc/macosx.html