Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 was the first Linux distro I ever installed, May 1999.
It was gone after a few weeks when I realized I had to manually fix things to get the 'at' command to work, and when it appeared that I would never be able make the innd installation work.
Went to redhat 6.0 which wasn't glitch free, but the basics worked.
(I'm very suspicious of anydistro that shows up with basic things not working. I ditched a Mandrake distro when it became clear that the email MTA wasn't going to work anytime soon (even local email didn't work). This was right after they ditched sendmail for postix, a good decision with a bad initial implementation.)
Anyhow, there isn't enough suffering to make me use SCaldera. I seriously doubt there will ever be consequences for any Linux users because a) their suit is a contract dispute with IBM and I didn't sign a contract with SCO when I installed Redhat and b) their suit is a bunch of crap, based on the idea that since they own some ancient code, they own everything ever done since that was in any way related. Look for them to get laughed out of court the first time someone takes a serious look at their case.
...so they shouldn't cost the same either. Most CDs have one or 2 good tunes and a lot of stuff that would not have sold much on it's own. So.99/song for all songs is silly. It may not always be apparent ahead of time what will sell the most, but it certainly is known after a few days or weeks. So adjust the price of the more popular up, the less popular down. If there's only one tune on an album that people actually want, this method eventually should eventually hit the point where people who weren't going to spend the (eg) $15 will spend the (eg) $3 and everyone makes out.
Since all this leads to is a page where you print off a license aggreement, send it with a check to SOC and wait fro response, it's just SO useful, right?
You totally missed the point. Either that or I totally missed your sarcasm. The idea of the parent is to hit SCO's server - bittorrent would defeat that.
if you're a private, profit-making company and YOU are expected to fix the OS after a year, then get out now
Not wholly true. Here's what the difference means:
For the enterprise server, for 5 years (if you pay for it), you'll be able to call Redhat for problems (very rare) and download patches as RPMs from Redhat Network (pretty frequent if you feel you need every patch to every app).
On the consumer system, you'll be able to do this for 1 year (if you pay).
After the one year period, non-Enterprise questions will go to other users (via email lists and Usenet) which is often better than professional support, and should be the first recourse in any case.
Patched software: you find another source for RPMs or patches will have to be compiled from source. Note that the whole compilation process wouldn't need to be redone on each identical machine - you should be able to './configure && make' on one machine, then tar the results over to your other maichines where you do a 'make install'. Definitely harder than downloading an RPM and running rpm, or using the up2date program to automagically get it from Redhat Network, though.
Re:Dvorak Predicts Death of Linux
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
Dvorak says:
VERSION B: SCO pays no attention to code ownership and concentrates on contract violations with IBM. SCO wins, and uses the victory as a precedent to go after the tainted code used by others. Corporations panic and flock to Microsoft
If code ownership is not the issue, if only contract volations is the issue, how does SCO come after ME? I didn't sign a contract with SCO. And any tainted code will be removed 25 minutes after it's revealed.
Sorry, VERSION B doesn't pan out.
Re:you *can* read the salon story freely...
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
Salon gave us HTML::Mason,
Huh?
Re:SCO still packs a punch?
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Would the team at SCO really keep pushing a lie,
It's all they have.
even though they know that by doing so they will face unspeakable countersuits after the trial(s)?
They have nothing left to lose. They've been dead for years. Linux and *BSD make them irrelevant. They have nothing left, except the outside chance that they'll be acquired and/or temporary inflation of stock. The desire to be acquired is why they are making threatening noises to Linux users, (blackmail to encouage IBM to shutSCO up by purchase) which were entirely undermined by Novell's staetments about copyright ownership.
HAHA, yea right. Had ya going there, didn't I?
FUCK! SHIT! FUCK! Why don't I read the WHOLE post before starting these long involved replies?
cat filename.txt | mail -s "Print this" me@somewhere.com
and then print the email using Outlook Express on a Windoze box.
There, now you don't have to buy a book.
I have a Redhat 7.2 system at home. Printing is fucked to high-heaven. I love Linux, but printing under Linux is a goddamn nightmare. It's even worse than under Windows, which is no picnic, but usually works.
Per Darl: "I'm not trying to screw up the Linux business,"
Then why did SOC send threatening letters to 1500 corporations telling them their were IP issues in Linux when:
SCO doesn't own the IP and
The lawsuit is a contract issue that can ONLY apply to IBM, especially once the offending code (if any actually exists) is revealed and written out of Linux.
The letter was nothing short of blackmail - give us money or we'll keep throwing turds into the punchbowl.
From the article: Because we are dealing with confidential source code that we have never released without confidentiality agreements, we will have to put in place nondisclosures [agreements] simply to protect the source.
They're clainiming that their code has been wrongly included in an Open Source system - what is this confidentiality they need to preserve and how will they preserve it? It's already freely available to the whole world.
From the article: Jim Waldo is a Distinguished Engineer with Sun Microsystems, where he is the lead architect for Jini, a distributed programming system based on Java.
Probably just a coincidence that he works on Java for Sun, who steadfastly refuses to submit Java to any standards body.
both left and right do not want companies to get away with 'hiding' a recall that could potentially hurt someone.
Unfortunately, your version of 'the right' is not the operative one. The businessman we see today would kill their own grandmothers to increase the value of their stock options. And the politicians they put in place want nothing more than to let them do it. Look at those scumbags Harvey Pitt and Michael Powell - thy can't move fast enough to sell us down the river.
Denying this with anecdotal stories or memories of Win9x is futile,
This is mostly true, especially the win9x part, at least as far as corporate world is concerned. (Any business that uses win9x just isn't serious about their data.) However, I work in a shop that still uses WinNT 4.0 and Linux is still noticeably better than that for reliability.
Actually, Microsoft has already had one of these of their own, regarding components of SQL server they licensed for themsleves, but not for their users, then distributed to said users. IIRC, it only affected users doing a specific type of delevelopment, but was embarassing enough that they may just keep their mouths shut for much of this one. Unfortunately I can't find references to this anywhere, but it was relativley recent.
They hold the contracts on hundreds fo thousands of artists who use the services provided by the RIAA.
In much the same way that antebellum slaveholders in the American South had 'contracts' of slaves who used the 'services' provided by the slaveholders. The RIAA are an oligopoly. Artists wishing to engage with one of its members (other than the already fablulously successful artist) are typically confronted with an identical contract which forces them to give up ALL rights to their own work. It is true they can choose not to sign these heinous contracts - but then they are out of the main game.
RIAA fails the 'clean hands' test - they have inhibited freedom of competition for many years, and recent court decisions confirm what we've all known - price-fixing is rampant.
I watched Flash Gordon reruns when I was young. Later someone made a porn movie called Flesh Gordon. My 'childhood memories are ruined'? I'm supposed to be all sad and shook-up? Honestly, you folks are just too sensitive.
I know there is some sort of Cisco support contract. The support is manintined by our central IT, so I don;t know the dtails, I suspect it's as you stated.
But that's not the point. The point is that even famoulsy expensive stuff can break. The support contract adds to the cost. The cheaper stuff might be the better deal if you can buy 2 or 3 of them and have them ready to in the event of failure.
a 300$ PC from walmart? I would have to worry about harware failure with hardware thats that cheap
Oh, expensive hardware never breaks? Good to know that.
Too bad no-one told our Cisco 7513 (enormously expensive when purchased) that went belly-up today and stayed that way through repeated power-cycles, in spite of dual processor cards and redundant power supplies.
Slashdot Mirror
Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 was the first Linux distro I ever installed, May 1999.
It was gone after a few weeks when I realized I had to manually fix things to get the 'at' command to work, and when it appeared that I would never be able make the innd installation work.
Went to redhat 6.0 which wasn't glitch free, but the basics worked.
(I'm very suspicious of anydistro that shows up with basic things not working. I ditched a Mandrake distro when it became clear that the email MTA wasn't going to work anytime soon (even local email didn't work). This was right after they ditched sendmail for postix, a good decision with a bad initial implementation.)
Anyhow, there isn't enough suffering to make me use SCaldera. I seriously doubt there will ever be consequences for any Linux users because a) their suit is a contract dispute with IBM and I didn't sign a contract with SCO when I installed Redhat and b) their suit is a bunch of crap, based on the idea that since they own some ancient code, they own everything ever done since that was in any way related. Look for them to get laughed out of court the first time someone takes a serious look at their case.
...so they shouldn't cost the same either. Most CDs have one or 2 good tunes and a lot of stuff that would not have sold much on it's own. So .99/song for all songs is silly. It may not always be apparent ahead of time what will sell the most, but it certainly is known after a few days or weeks. So adjust the price of the more popular up, the less popular down. If there's only one tune on an album that people actually want, this method eventually should eventually hit the point where people who weren't going to spend the (eg) $15 will spend the (eg) $3 and everyone makes out.
Since all this leads to is a page where you print off a license aggreement, send it with a check to SOC and wait fro response, it's just SO useful, right?
You totally missed the point. Either that or I totally missed your sarcasm. The idea of the parent is to hit SCO's server - bittorrent would defeat that.
if you're a private, profit-making company and YOU are expected to fix the OS after a year, then get out now
Not wholly true. Here's what the difference means:
For the enterprise server, for 5 years (if you pay for it), you'll be able to call Redhat for problems (very rare) and download patches as RPMs from Redhat Network (pretty frequent if you feel you need every patch to every app).
On the consumer system, you'll be able to do this for 1 year (if you pay).
After the one year period, non-Enterprise questions will go to other users (via email lists and Usenet) which is often better than professional support, and should be the first recourse in any case.
Patched software: you find another source for RPMs or patches will have to be compiled from source. Note that the whole compilation process wouldn't need to be redone on each identical machine - you should be able to './configure && make' on one machine, then tar the results over to your other maichines where you do a 'make install'. Definitely harder than downloading an RPM and running rpm, or using the up2date program to automagically get it from Redhat Network, though.
If code ownership is not the issue, if only contract volations is the issue, how does SCO come after ME? I didn't sign a contract with SCO. And any tainted code will be removed 25 minutes after it's revealed.
Sorry, VERSION B doesn't pan out.
Salon gave us HTML::Mason,
Huh?
Would the team at SCO really keep pushing a lie,
It's all they have.
even though they know that by doing so they will face unspeakable countersuits after the trial(s)?
They have nothing left to lose. They've been dead for years. Linux and *BSD make them irrelevant. They have nothing left, except the outside chance that they'll be acquired and/or temporary inflation of stock. The desire to be acquired is why they are making threatening noises to Linux users, (blackmail to encouage IBM to shutSCO up by purchase) which were entirely undermined by Novell's staetments about copyright ownership.
HAHA, yea right. Had ya going there, didn't I?
FUCK! SHIT! FUCK! Why don't I read the WHOLE post before starting these long involved replies?
The parent, modded down as a troll, said:
cat filename.txt | mail -s "Print this" me@somewhere.com
and then print the email using Outlook Express on a Windoze box.
There, now you don't have to buy a book.
I have a Redhat 7.2 system at home. Printing is fucked to high-heaven. I love Linux, but printing under Linux is a goddamn nightmare. It's even worse than under Windows, which is no picnic, but usually works.
The dipshit that posted the article linked the wrong doc. Here is the right one: http://www.egovos.org/pdf/OSSinDoD.pdf
I thought only the place I worked was that stupid (though they finally fixed this a few years ago). Infuriating.
Then why did SOC send threatening letters to 1500 corporations telling them their were IP issues in Linux when:
- SCO doesn't own the IP and
- The lawsuit is a contract issue that can ONLY apply to IBM, especially once the offending code (if any actually exists) is revealed and written out of Linux.
The letter was nothing short of blackmail - give us money or we'll keep throwing turds into the punchbowl.From the article: Because we are dealing with confidential source code that we have never released without confidentiality agreements, we will have to put in place nondisclosures [agreements] simply to protect the source.
They're clainiming that their code has been wrongly included in an Open Source system - what is this confidentiality they need to preserve and how will they preserve it? It's already freely available to the whole world.
From the article: Jim Waldo is a Distinguished Engineer with Sun Microsystems, where he is the lead architect for Jini, a distributed programming system based on Java.
Probably just a coincidence that he works on Java for Sun, who steadfastly refuses to submit Java to any standards body.
both left and right do not want companies to get away with 'hiding' a recall that could potentially hurt someone.
Unfortunately, your version of 'the right' is not the operative one. The businessman we see today would kill their own grandmothers to increase the value of their stock options. And the politicians they put in place want nothing more than to let them do it. Look at those scumbags Harvey Pitt and Michael Powell - thy can't move fast enough to sell us down the river.
Denying this with anecdotal stories or memories of Win9x is futile,
This is mostly true, especially the win9x part, at least as far as corporate world is concerned. (Any business that uses win9x just isn't serious about their data.) However, I work in a shop that still uses WinNT 4.0 and Linux is still noticeably better than that for reliability.
...in the pocketbook. Move alll domain registrations away from Network Solutions and Verisign. godaddy.com works for us.
Network Solutions is amazingly incompetent and assholish. I've been meaning to do this for months, finally just did.
Actually, Microsoft has already had one of these of their own, regarding components of SQL server they licensed for themsleves, but not for their users, then distributed to said users. IIRC, it only affected users doing a specific type of delevelopment, but was embarassing enough that they may just keep their mouths shut for much of this one. Unfortunately I can't find references to this anywhere, but it was relativley recent.
They hold the contracts on hundreds fo thousands of artists who use the services provided by the RIAA.
In much the same way that antebellum slaveholders in the American South had 'contracts' of slaves who used the 'services' provided by the slaveholders. The RIAA are an oligopoly. Artists wishing to engage with one of its members (other than the already fablulously successful artist) are typically confronted with an identical contract which forces them to give up ALL rights to their own work. It is true they can choose not to sign these heinous contracts - but then they are out of the main game.
RIAA fails the 'clean hands' test - they have inhibited freedom of competition for many years, and recent court decisions confirm what we've all known - price-fixing is rampant.
There's a couple of world-beaters. Never heard of either.
I watched Flash Gordon reruns when I was young. Later someone made a porn movie called Flesh Gordon. My 'childhood memories are ruined'? I'm supposed to be all sad and shook-up? Honestly, you folks are just too sensitive.
I know there is some sort of Cisco support contract. The support is manintined by our central IT, so I don;t know the dtails, I suspect it's as you stated.
But that's not the point. The point is that even famoulsy expensive stuff can break. The support contract adds to the cost. The cheaper stuff might be the better deal if you can buy 2 or 3 of them and have them ready to in the event of failure.
a 300$ PC from walmart? I would have to worry about harware failure with hardware thats that cheap
Oh, expensive hardware never breaks? Good to know that.
Too bad no-one told our Cisco 7513 (enormously expensive when purchased) that went belly-up today and stayed that way through repeated power-cycles, in spite of dual processor cards and redundant power supplies.
When you chose a reputable company's solutions, you can count on security vulnerabilities being addresses quickly
Like microsoft. Yeah, that model works really great.