On Sunday 10 August 2003 12:26 pm, David E. Fox wrote: > > 1. After reading this article ... > > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001436280_linux > >group08.html > > Please put that back. :) I couldn't access it. :) > > > I am left wondering; where does Intel stand in the debate? Are they > > officially on the M$ side of things are are they attempting to play > > Even if that's relevant, AMD makes better processors. See tom's > hardware. AMD (ca 2001 when I put this box together, at that time > the Pentium 4 had just surfaced) is better and faster at the same clock > speed than P4. There are still serious issues like cache and pipeline > stalls in the P4, unless Intel fixed that since. If Intel is more > MS-friendly than they should be, I don't know. I'll stick with AMD. I, > for one, don't want a computer that keeps track of my existence and > reports to MS - I know I exist, and don't need any help in that area. Of > course, I'm referring to the increasing possibility of DMCA-aware > computing, with processors that detect or refuse to run stuff.) > > I can sum up the SCO effort in 2 words: unjust enrichment. > > I read another article which made the point that at one time SCO (they > acquired Caldera, right?) was actively trying to market a "commercial" > Linux distro. I never opted for Caldera, but I read the reviews and > such. Now, they did much of that through GPL, no? Did SCO commit any > *non GPL* changes to the Linux kernel? No - they would have been > rejected by Linus. (Anyone got his input?) > > AIX is a totally different animal than Linux. The kernels are different. > How dare SCO tell IBM that every customer is now using an > illegal product. (we use AIX + Pick at work). But isn't that SCO's > argument? That Linux got "polluted" by source from AIX? > > Redhat, Mandrake, debian, etc. have not signed contracts with SCO to my > knowledge. I know I didn't. I can't be in violation of a non-existant > license. SCO will never see any money from me. Might as well tell them > that if Linux did not exist, millions of people probably would be > pirating SCO, or perhaps Windows. > > > neutral in all of this. I have never used an AMD processor and I wasn't > > AMD is superior. > > > license for software they shipped me under the pretense that it was > > 'free'? > > Was it shrinkwrapped? Did it have a non-GPL type license to it? > > There have been precedences in the user community reactions over the > years - involving en masse switching to the competition. For instance, > rememmber SEA versus Phil Katz? The result of that was thousands of > BBSes switching to ZIP, almost overnight. GIF licensing threats from > Unisys engendered a similar reaction, more recently. > > So if SCO wins, I'll switch to FreeBSD :). I'd rather not, though. > FreeBSD is fine, but I think it would require a lot more post-install > setup than Linux distros do ATM. I could be wrong on that - I haven't > tried it in a very long time. > > > -=Thinker > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > David E. Fox Thanks for letting me > [EMAIL PROTECTED] change magnetic patterns > [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually the way I read it was that Caldera acquired SCO and then since they were bringing in more revenue on SCO products, they changed the company name from Caldera to SCO. Better identifies with what they sold more of at less of a loss. So basically the SCO interests took over the Caldera interests and some of the Caldera Officers who were pro open source left the company. Now named SCO of course. That is my take on the convolutions of this nefarious company. -- Dennis M. linux user #180842
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
