> > where is the proof that SCO's close sourse didn't came from open source Linux code. > > There isn't. So? Are you saying that it came from > Linux? Or just > bad-mouthing SCO?
I dare not. No bad mouthing. Just a thought. But don’t u think it may be a possibility. Infact ‘Facts comes out of possible guesses’. And I m not the alone shouting see what LL and raj mailed today http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/enterprise/story/0,2000048640,20276662,00.htm > > to me SCO seems to be a frontend of Redmond and if it is not so ,atleast soemway inspired from Redmond. > > Assume they are. So? The case still stays valid, > doesn't it? > Yes sir! absolutely right. Even if it is ‘intentionally’ or ‘unintentionally’ fabricated “Case is still valid” and that’s why still they have right to act like that and other ppl hasn’t come out in defense. But Won’t u defend if someone attacking ur den. U go by history! Find how Redmond had become so big. They kill their competitors ruthlessly either by hook or crook. Although they acted late but they have started against Linux (wait! SCO is just start, u will see more coming to your horror). Ah! Survival of the fittest. > > regarding possibilities of SCO's actions towards > > the companies that use Linux, They just want to > > put salt on Linux wounds as their case againt IBM > > is heading nowhere. > > It is. This is the 3rd time this week that I have > heard this. What > do you mena "not going anywhere"? Both sides waived > their rights to > an expidited trial, and as per the calendar, the > oral arguements will > begin in early 2005. In todays world 1 1/5 year is a big time, a very big time. Nobody knows where things will be heading by 2005. it may be possible that by that time Redmond looses all it’s server/partial Desktop market to Linux (what is use of creating all this fuss then). U know SCO was also selling Linux (open source). So what u say on this point. Boss! SCO was also selling open source Linux. When they r selling it by themselves do they have right to object now. Ponder on it. Indirectly they may have contributed by themselves (it is also just a possibility; as I said facts comes out of possibilities) > > so the only way for them is to go behind user rather, if user is in trouble then > > ofcourse service provider is in trouble. Quote from an article on Zdnet “SCO appears to have forgotten that some of the biggest Linux users are the Linux vendors and supporters themselves... there are plenty of Linux supporters and users who have deep enough pockets to challenge its copyright infringement claims: Oracle, Dell, HP and IBM," I am sure u must be keeping an eye on last 2-3 days developments “IBM backlashed” (more will come little later, this is just trailer u r yet to see whole movie” > > as gartner said best approach for companies during this time of crises would be wait > > and watch rather than rushing to SCO, just a bit of delaying Linux implementations > > will do better things or better no need to slow down things. > > Sorry, which one is better? Delaying Linux, or not > slowing down? > In my opinion it all depends on what u want to do with Linux. Read this http://news.com.com/2009-1122-1010047.html > > SCO is just acting like a 'Goonda' attempting to > > extort funds from the Linux users without proving > its > > claims in ways that allow users to respond. > > Wait a minute. They went to court and alleged > things about IBM, thus > giving IBM a forum to respond. You bad mouth them > on a list, without > CC:ing them. And you call _them_ a "goonda ok! Who is a goonda! "SCO is asking customers to pay money based on pure unsubstantiated threats, without offering any facts." That is why I said goonda. I am not guilty, I have not done anything wrong but still somebody is threatening me without proving allegation, then I m bound to call that person “goonda” “bullying me” or x,y,z …. And don’t forget to read this http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/enterprise/story/0,2000048640,20276629,00.htm > > Getting in agreement with SCO just because of allegations rather than facts would be most stupid thing. > > Sorry, cannot resist quoting Dave Barry. "That is > not the most stupid > thing to do. I can think of thousands of things > more stupid." Ok! Pay them. After all it’s ur money. Who cares if u want to through it in dustbin too. J But before any action read this http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0,10801,83477,00.html > > > what FSF or somebody like that can do at the > moment is > > "SUE SCO Over adopting unethical practicies", > either > > show us trouble code immediately or pay to FSF". > > Why not you? Heck, I will put my money where my > mouth is, and spring > up cash to your legal fund. You get to keep all the > money SCO pays > you after you win the case over "adopting unethical > practices". Where is money ;) first gimme that then I will see whether to sue SCO or not ;) > heard. As Voltaire said, "I will oppose what you > say, but I willd > defend your right to say it". Common yaar! Be practical. Who is opposing their right. Say whatever u want but prove it too. A good article worth reading http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0,10801,83452,00.html anyway! Sorry! If u felt bad. I am not flaming anybody. I am not an avid user of Linux and nor do I advocate windows. I am just a technology enthusiast. If something works better I like it. If you want to compete with open source products, do so honestly, and show yourself for what you are. I will gladly advocate ur product, and if I am convinced about its capabilities and suitability to a task, I will recommend it to others too. But I will not endorse something, which is absolutely wrong. “Advocacy for the sake of advocacy is not just useless; it defeats the purpose”. I m not objecting on SCO’s right to say but What I am objecting to is using the guise of OpenSource to sell your product at the cost of the success and adoption of OpenSource. Aaaaaaaaa! Who is John Galt ???????? Regards, Puneet --- "Sanjeev \"Ghane\" Gupta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday, July 28, 2003 6:27 PM [GMT+0800=SGT], > puneet goel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > where is the proof that SCO's close sourse didn't > came > > from open source Linux code. > > There isn't. So? Are you saying that it came from > Linux? Or just > bad-mouthing SCO? > > > to me SCO seems to be a frontend of Redmond and if > it > > is not so ,atleast soemway inspired from Redmond. > > Assume they are. So? The case still stays valid, > doesn't it? > > > regarding possibilities of SCO's actions towards > the > > companies that use Linux, They just want to put > salt > > on Linux wounds as their case againt IBM is > heading > > nowhere. > > It is. This is the 3rd time this week that I have > heard this. What > do you mena "not going anywhere"? Both sides waived > their rights to > an expidited trial, and as per the calendar, the > oral arguements will > begin in early 2005. > > > so the only way for them is to go behind user > > rather, if user is in trouble then ofcourse > service > > provider is in trouble. They want to gain by > putting > > unrest in Linux community. yes! this will make > things > > slow. > > > > as gartner said best approach for companies during > > this time of crises would be wait and watch rather > > than rushing to SCO, just a bit of delaying Linux > > implementations will do better things or better no > > need to slow down things. > > Sorry, which one is better? Delaying Linux, or not > slowing down? > > > SCO is just acting like a 'Goonda' attempting to > > extort funds from the Linux users without proving > its > > claims in ways that allow users to respond. > > Wait a minute. They went to court and alleged > things about IBM, thus > giving IBM a forum to respond. You bad mouth them > on a list, without > CC:ing them. And you call _them_ a "goonda"? > > > Getting in agreement with SCO just because of > > allegations rather than facts would be most stupid > > thing. > > Sorry, cannot resist quoting Dave Barry. "That is > not the most stupid > thing to do. I can think of thousands of things > more stupid." > > > what FSF or somebody like that can do at the > moment is > > "SUE SCO Over adopting unethical practicies", > either > > show us trouble code immediately or pay to FSF". > > Why not you? Heck, I will put my money where my > mouth is, and spring > up cash to your legal fund. You get to keep all the > money SCO pays > you after you win the case over "adopting unethical > practices". > > Folks, SCO has a right to sue IBM. Their right > persists even if we > all "know" they are wrong. Our perception of SCO > fits the definition > of prejudice (pre--judice), as in deciding before > the facts have been > heard. As Voltaire said, "I will oppose what you > say, but I willd > defend your right to say it". > -- > Sanjeev > > > _______________________________________________ > ilugd mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
