no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=2153 perhaps expected but jury ruled SCO did not have the copyrights. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
The good thing about standards...
The good thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from... especially when you propose one standard, it is rejected, then the subsequent standard is approved but you only implement the one that was rejected. http://www.adjb.net/post/Microsoft-Fails-the-Standards-Test.aspx While I am convinced that today is proof positive that Steve Jobs is PT Barnum reincarnated, the above link pretty much clarifies why interchangeable data between applications is impossible. Because they never had any intentions of incorporating the standards that they had written. It's clear to me that both Apple and Microsoft believe that people just don't care that both companies have every intention of making you pay for perceived convenience while working feverishly to obscure the efforts that they spend to limit your options. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
I find it amusing that Novell slapped SCO and SCO had the balls to try this. It was pretty plain that they Had acquire the IP legitimately and were quite happy leaving the world alone SCO was not and their case was done until they could prove it was their IP. was a very poor and sad strategy on SCO's part and at one time they had a very solid product... On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Craig White craigwh...@azapple.com wrote: http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=2153 perhaps expected but jury ruled SCO did not have the copyrights. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
Not to mention galvanizing the Linux and Unix communities... On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Kevin Fries kfri...@gmail.com wrote: SCO was a second class player in the UNIX world behind BSD and Sun. Then they switched to Linux, and became a second class player behind Debian and Red Hat. This is the sign of a poorly run business. Having failed twice, SCO then did the unthinkable, the took large amounts of money from Microsoft. Next thing you know, they are right in the middle of a FUD (Fear, Uncertainly, and Disinformation) campaign. Coincidence? I for one don't think so. SCO was a pawn, sent to their doom by a company who is trying desperately to hold onto their illegal monopoly. The real loser in all of this was Microsoft. They pent allot of money tking a two bit loser of a company and propped them up in an attempt to cause the Linux community to self destruct. Not only has it not worked, they have had to put more resources in than they wanted, and have been completely sucker punched by Apple. Just my $0.02 Kevin Fries On Apr 3, 2010 4:53 PM, Stephen cryptwo...@gmail.com wrote: I find it amusing that Novell slapped SCO and SCO had the balls to try this. It was pretty plain that they Had acquire the IP legitimately and were quite happy leaving the world alone SCO was not and their case was done until they could prove it was their IP. was a very poor and sad strategy on SCO's part and at one time they had a very solid product... On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Craig White craigwh...@azapple.com wrote: http://www.novell.com... -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - plug-disc...@lists.p... --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 17:20 -0600, Kevin Fries wrote: SCO was a second class player in the UNIX world behind BSD and Sun. Then they switched to Linux, and became a second class player behind Debian and Red Hat. This is the sign of a poorly run business. Having failed twice, SCO then did the unthinkable, the took large amounts of money from Microsoft. Next thing you know, they are right in the middle of a FUD (Fear, Uncertainly, and Disinformation) campaign. Coincidence? I for one don't think so. SCO was a pawn, sent to their doom by a company who is trying desperately to hold onto their illegal monopoly. The real loser in all of this was Microsoft. They pent allot of money tking a two bit loser of a company and propped them up in an attempt to cause the Linux community to self destruct. Not only has it not worked, they have had to put more resources in than they wanted, and have been completely sucker punched by Apple. I don't recall how much money Microsoft gave to SCO but I don't recall it being much more than a few hundred million which in corporate world of today's finance is just chump change considering the intent to slow open source/free software adoption. I don't get the sucker punched by Apple comment at all. In fact, I see Apple and Microsoft as very complicit players these days and the competition is more of an illusion than real. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 15:04 -0700, Craig White wrote: http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=2153 perhaps expected but jury ruled SCO did not have the copyrights. on topic... Bizarre Cathedral cartoon http://fsmsh.com/3315 Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
Apple was sitting on a bucket load of cash with no idea what to do with it. Microsoft underestimated the strength of the Linux community. Felt that a few bucks and legal support to Score would cause the Linux menence to go away... when it didn't work, they put in several more infusions of cash. Meanwhile, with Microsoft distracted with world domination, the player that MS saw as the lesser threat dumped bucket loads of cash into both RD and advertising. This attack came out of nowhere, unless you were paying close attention to the underlying market forces. Apple laid in the weeds, waited for MS to over react, then hit them. They now increased their desktop presence by more than 10% of the total market, are seen as the innovator they once were, an have given MS a market headache far greater than the one they went after when they wrote Apple off for Dead. Personally, I call that a first class sucker punch Kevin Fries On Apr 3, 2010 5:53 PM, Craig White craigwh...@azapple.com wrote: On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 17:20 -0600, Kevin Fries wrote: SCO was a second class player in the UNIX wo... I don't recall how much money Microsoft gave to SCO but I don't recall it being much more than a few hundred million which in corporate world of today's finance is just chump change considering the intent to slow open source/free software adoption. I don't get the sucker punched by Apple comment at all. In fact, I see Apple and Microsoft as very complicit players these days and the competition is more of an illusion than real. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is ... --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 18:35 -0600, Kevin Fries wrote: Apple was sitting on a bucket load of cash with no idea what to do with it. Microsoft underestimated the strength of the Linux community. Felt that a few bucks and legal support to Score would cause the Linux menence to go away... when it didn't work, they put in several more infusions of cash. Meanwhile, with Microsoft distracted with world domination, the player that MS saw as the lesser threat dumped bucket loads of cash into both RD and advertising. This attack came out of nowhere, unless you were paying close attention to the underlying market forces. Apple laid in the weeds, waited for MS to over react, then hit them. They now increased their desktop presence by more than 10% of the total market, are seen as the innovator they once were, an have given MS a market headache far greater than the one they went after when they wrote Apple off for Dead. Personally, I call that a first class sucker punch #1 - what did Apple innovate lately? I must have missed it because I've been using Linux for too long now. #2 - I haven't seen a report that Apple is getting more than 7.3% of desktop OS sales... http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/01/01/survey-mac-os-hit-record-73-share-in-december-iphone-up-33/ where do you get this 10% figure? #3 - I suppose that one could conceivably debate how Windows 7 has essentially blunted any UI differences with OS X but it's pretty much ho hum in my view either way... both are essentially cut from the same cloth. The only OS less interesting in businesses than Windows 7 is OS X. But Microsoft wins just by entrenchment alone. Now as for real innovation... let's give the world a very large iPod touch without the ability to use any of the accessories already available, get people to pony up for accessories that should have been standard features and induce them to subscribe for services like magazines, newspapers, television content and maybe another $30 a month for ATT. Love that. I think the emperor has no clothes. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
