1414291
story
Corrado writes
"According to this article over at Linux Box SuSE Is "Reevaulating Our Relationship" with SCO Group. There is also a reference to this article in wired about OSS developers rallying behind IBM. The best line of the article is "Eric Raymond called SCO's move 'deeply stupid...'""
Good. (Score:5, Interesting)
Why should they stick around when SCO shoots itself in the foot?
My faith in SuSE will continue (Score:2)
SuSE *IS* United Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
If SuSE drops out, do the "UnitedLinux" gang have anything left? Isn't UnitedLinux based upon SuSE 8.1?
Re:SuSE *IS* United Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
Are they pretty screwed though? Yeah...
Re:SuSE *IS* United Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:SuSE *IS* United Linux (Score:5, Funny)
Its kind of like Voltron for crap.
Re:SuSE *IS* United Linux (Score:5, Funny)
In other news.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In other news.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In other news.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Henry, Henry
Henry: I do not think he'll listen lad
Hard to believe they're the only ones (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Hard to believe they're the only ones (Score:2, Informative)
> SCO lets loose with one of the silent-but-deadly variety, and everybody is still in the room?
It's more like an elevator: everyone is eagerly awaiting the next stop.
Re:Hard to believe they're the only ones (Score:3, Funny)
Wrong Wired Link (Score:5, Informative)
This is the correct link [wired.com] http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,579 55,00.html
Bad news. (Score:5, Interesting)
United Linux and/or LSB (Score:5, Interesting)
The standardization process for Linux is the LSB. That is where our efforts should be placed. If vendors want to pool their efforts beyond that, all good and well, but the LSB should be our primary focus.
Actually, I am glad to see SuSE make this move. Unfortunately this may be *REALLY BAD* for TurboLinux but they should have known what they were getting into.
Re:Bad news. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bad news. (Score:5, Interesting)
01/14/2003
UnitedLinux Signs IBM and AMD as First Technology Partners
Didn't take them long (less than 2 months) to screw over their first serious partner. I figured there'd be problems when I tried to download their (unitedlinux) distro after they sent me an email saying it was available, and their server was pretty much hosed.
Which would be better... (Score:4, Interesting)
Perhaps SCO-Caldera has made it plain that they have no intention of leaving United Linux. If so, then it's a good bet that the other vendors will find it necessary to withdraw and leave SCO-Caldera holding the bag, so to speak.
Re:Which would be better... (Score:2, Interesting)
If they kicked SCO out, SCO would probably turn around and find some excuse to sue. Leave, wait a bit, and reform under a different name would probably be better.
Re:Which would be better... (Score:5, Funny)
ReUnited Linux!
Oh dear.... did I actually just post that?
Re:Which would be better... (Score:4, Funny)
KFG
Re:Which would be better... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Which would be better... (Score:2)
and it feels so good (Score:2)
Re: Which would be better... (Score:2, Funny)
>
Yep, they could all quit and then start a new consortium without inviting SCO to join.
SCO would undoubtedly sue them though, claiming that it was impossible for a consortium to work without stealing something from SCO.
Re:Which would be better... (Score:3, Insightful)
How does "*reevaluating* our relationship with the SCO Group" get universally interpreted as "unconditional withdrawl from UnitedLinux"? If I'm not mistaken, the SuSE guy also said: "That said, we want to very clearly and unequivocally voice our support of the ideals and goals of UnitedLinux and the Linux community." To me, it seems like SuSE is sending a subtle message to the other members of UnitedLinux, urging them to adopt their own posture toward SCO. I mean, it seems childish for SuSE to quit on account of one rogue member. Doesn't the rest of UnitedLinux stand to loose much more from loosing SuSE than keeping SCO? Perhaps I don't understand the group dynamics involved in a collaberation like UnitedLinux, but the impression I get from reading the threads on this story make it seem like individual members of the consortium, for the most part, do their own thing....hardly a good way to accomplish a *United*anything.
Re:Which would be better... (Score:2)
SCO claims sole ownership of the UNIX trademark
So the new partnership coulb be called UN-UNIX
(sort of like a pun on the UN as well)
Re:Which would be better... (Score:3, Funny)
SCO claims sole ownership of the UNIX trademark
Leaving aside for a moment the fact that the UNIX trademark is owned by the Open Group and that what SCO owns is the source code of the original Linux....
Are you suggesting that they call it UNSCO?
I have a better idea-- UNSCO Megaconglomerate, or UNSCOM, and then they can ask the NSA to join with their SE-Linux
OK, so that was a really bad joke with war looming with Iraq and all, but it had to be said
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Irony (Score:2, Funny)
"SCOldera - You Innovate, We Litigate"
With the current legal system, those with the money always win. Companies like SuSE cannot possibly sustain legal action. So in a way it's good they picked a fight with IBM - at least they've got lawyers to spare.
It'll be interesting to see how SCOldera either tries to backpedal or dies a horrible flaming death. I vote for option 2
Re:Irony (Score:4, Interesting)
An interesting strategy to be sure, but here's the kicker: the company that they borrowed this strategy from was none other than IBM. I wonder if IBM is looking real hard at SCO's products for violations right now...
Re:Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Irony (Score:2)
Re:Irony (Score:2)
Re:Irony (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless SCO/Caldera put the code in question into the Linux software base themselves, that sorts of claims are groundless. If we're gonna defeat the SCO suit against IBM/Linux we need to do it with arguements that make sense.
Re:Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not at all like saying that. It's saying that if you hold a software patent, and release an implementation of that patent under the GPL, everybody who uses the GPL can use your patent. If they have patents that cover Linux, and they ship linux under the GPL, they've given free license to their patents, but if they have other patents that aren't implemented in linux, then other companies/people still have to arrange for licensing.
Unless SCO/Caldera put the code in question into the Linux software base themselves, that sorts of claims are groundless.
They didn't have to put them there, they just had to ship them. By redistributing them they agreed to the terms of the GPL implicitly.
Re:Irony (Score:3, Funny)
They distributed the code.
The GPL was the license that gave them the right to distribute Linux and all the other GPL code in their distribution. So yes, they are now subject to the terms of the GPL.
Aha! Now I see it. SCO's in the tank but attacks IBM which has deep pockets, and many lawyers, and is not afraid of a fight.
What company has loads of cash, doesn't like IBM, and could easily buy off the holders of a fading company like SCO on the condition they make it appear that their demise was caused by the GPL? Which company would profit the most by such publicity?
Just kidding. :) Well, I think I'm just kidding.
Re:Irony (Score:2)
Dumping toxic waste into your neighbor's yard does not help you in the long run.
Way to Go SCO! Maybe there is life in Minix (Score:3, Interesting)
Assholes.
Suse Run (Score:5, Funny)
I would not let my dog be associated with the three lettter acronym SCO.
Re: Suse Run (Score:2, Funny)
> I would not let my dog be associated with the three lettter acronym SCO.
I wish some of my neighbors would have their dogs "associate with" SCO rather than with the lawn in front of my apartment.
Doesn't appear that way? (Score:3, Insightful)
So, how do you interpret this to mean that SuSE is backing out of UnitedLinux?
Re:Doesn't appear that way? (Score:2)
Now I'm rambling on... I didn't even RTFA. =)
Re:Doesn't appear that way? (Score:4, Insightful)
The article is very vague and so are the statements.
My guess is that SuSE is attempting to use what leverage they have to affect a change in the direction of United Linux and SCO. My guess is that SuSE in its statements is also attempting to speak to the other UL parners as well.
This does not mean that they have made a decision one way or another. But they may be consulting with Turbolinux and Conectiva as to options for ditching SCO. That will be about time
SCO sues IBM (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SCO sues IBM (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SCO sues IBM (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:SCO sues IBM (Score:2)
Caldera sposored the work in question (Score:5, Informative)
The so called "Enterprise features" were developed by the Linux community on hardware provided by Caldera and with support of Caldera Engineers. Which means that they knew what development was under way, at the very least. IBM had very little to do with it, but some of the Linux Community hackers now work there (yeah IBM).
Caldera was involved in selling Linux into the traditional SCO markerplace long before IBM even took notice, and had some of the best talent in Utah, who had seen the internals of UNIX at Novell before it was sold to SCO, working on it.
This suit shows a complete lack of history at Caldera/SCO, which is not surprising since they have had huge staff turn over in thier death throws. Here's hoping they go away quickly, if not quietly... just like their bastard child Lineo did.
Re:Caldera sposored the work in question (Score:5, Informative)
Caldera provided me the SMP machine that was used to write Linux SMP support, that was why they provided it and thats one big reason it happened at that time.
And most of the theory for it came not from secret unix knowledge but a book 8)
Another over reaction (Score:3, Informative)
SCO's mistake was holding up Linux as being indirectly responsible, and worse, insulting it and all the volunteers that worked on it over the years.
Linus seems to share a similar point of view, if I've understood his comments correctly.
SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
My prediction: YANC (Yet Another Name Change) for SCO/Caldera/Flavor_OF_The_Week. Then Chapter 7 (a Chapter 11 filing would be pointless, as there's really nothing left worth anything anymore).
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
That's not to say that IBM shouldn't DEVALUE SCO stock before buying a controlling interest. Remember, IBM only has to be the largest shareholder. They don't have to buy ALL of SCO.
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
No, I think IBM is going to fight it. Why would they want SCO? True, it would get them off the hook for any Unix licensing issues, but it would also leave them stuck with supporting OpenServer, UnixWare... and a Linux distribution, which is a business they've made it clear they don't want to be in.
I think the closest they'd come to buying SCO is counter-suing them over their IBM's own IP, and possibly forcing them to re-negotiate their SYS V licensing. But most of SCO would be a white elephant to IBM.
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:5, Informative)
The group that controls SCO has a 5.8% share [trolltech.com] in TrollTech. They do not in any way control the company. Even by the usual standards of anti-Qt/KDE FUD, claiming they have any significant connection to SCO is pretty weak.
Re:SCO v. IBM...it's not gonna happen. (Score:2)
I didn't notice this page when I went surfing on the qt site when the whole SCO story blew, so thanks for the link. I totally dig both KDE and QT and am pleased to see the employees themselves have control over Trolltech.
Which Article Did Slashdot Editors Read? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Which Article Did Slashdot Editors Read? (Score:5, Insightful)
So they are reevaluating their membership in the UnitedLinux consortium, as that membership is their primary (and perhaps only) relationship with SCO Group. I'm sure if SCO were to leave the UnitedLinux consortium, SuSE would be happy to stay.
Re:Which Article Did Slashdot Editors Read? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's certainly NOT how I read it. He said he was supporting the ideals and goals which would be completely different from actually saying he'd support UnitedLinux itself.
On the contrary, it seems to me that he purposefully avoided saying that he supported UnitedLinux. This is political-talk, didn't you learn how to decode it at school?
Oh no! (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone know where I can pick up a cheap copy of Windows??
Last one out, turn off the lights!
Linux is dying... (Score:5, Funny)
FreeBSD is an excellent choice of operating system. We're happy to share it with any poor Linux refugees such as yourself. I think you've all suffered enough.
(With only a hint of sarcasm.
Right On! (Score:5, Insightful)
They'd be making the right decision in pulling out of UL. From my own personal experience working _at_ IBM, I can tell you first hand the commitment they have towards the Linux community is very real. Conversely, I don't think the Linux community has anything to fear by putting their support behind Big Blue.
Its pretty obvious that SCO's recent "Hail Mary" play is falling flat on its face..Rather than adapt their business model, they're executing one last, desparate attempt to stay in business without a viable customer pool.
Sad, when you get down to it. The suits at SCO are going to run that company into the ground.
ESR (Score:5, Interesting)
During a talk here in Oxford University's computing lab, Eric Raymond proclaimed that "UNIX died because it was closed-source", and then refused to accept that Microsoft's multi-billion dollar success suggested that otherwise.
Ever since then, I've taken ESR's pronouncements with several grains of salt.
Re:ESR (Score:2)
In a more recent talk at the Comlab, a Microsoft demonstrator said that one of the most exciting things about .NET was the shared source scheme, through which you could obtain source code for the CLR.
He then explained that this wasn't the same source code as that which the CLR actually used. Kindof suggests that although Microsoft are paying attention to the increasing call for Open Source, they still don't quite get the point.
I realise I've gone offtopic now, I just wanted to prove what a useful tool the 'net can be. Two people a few tens of yards away from each other can now communicate via a server in America, ain't technology wonderful? :-)
In other news, the dinosaurs... (Score:4, Insightful)
Um, where was the open source version of Windows that Microsoft had to compete against?
In other news, scientists proclaimed that dinosaurs died because they were no longer adapted to the environment, and then refused to accept that their huge skeletons and the large quantity of other life forms they consumed proved otherwise.
Re:ESR (Score:3, Insightful)
It's true, it's just incomplete.
Unix died because it was closed source and internally competitive. It fractured into a slew of islands of mutually incompatible enhancements, none of which, with the possible exception of Solaris, had sufficient momentum to stand alone.
By contrast, Microsoft, being closed source and a unity, is motivated to converge rather than diverge its OSes, so it doesn't fragment its' user base.
Although... (Score:3, Interesting)
I dont think this decission has got anything to do with Linux or Open Source Philosophy as Suse is trying to make it look it.
Suse has business relation ships with IBM, if i am not wrong IBM linux m/cs do run Suse linux on them
SCO should realise that with out UnitedLinux they don't have much business to look forward to. Infact i would be surprised if they can even afford the legal fees to persue the lawsuit.
Typical SuSE (Score:5, Insightful)
2) Do not reap the PR benefits, nor spin the relationship strongly in the public eye at all.
3) Allow some partner to control the spin to their own agenda (in this case Caldera/SCO).
4) Eventually find that the partner has taken a (to SuSE's viewpoint) incredulous stand. Publically state that they do not agree.
5) Partnership and sails of other company deflate/dissolve.
SuSE is a somewhat naive company in the way it forms alliance, makes choices, etc. They do not believe in strong spin or overbearing marketing. They do not believe in half-truth statements or downplaying their competitors. There may be exceptions to this (there's no single decisionmaker running the whole show), but as a general rule it holds.
When I was there, it was fairly common for them to observe a sharply competitive move and collectively shake their heads. They _do_ believe in making better products, so this kind of competition is welcomed with open arms, but patent lawsuits are viewed in this sort of way I see as typical german: "This is not good."
All in all, I have to say I saw this as the eventual outcome of United Linux. I see SuSE and Connectiva as technology leaders, with Turbo and SCO/Caldera ultimately hamstrung by the strange politics/business of their leadership. The former can make a solid partnership, no doubt, the latter pair do not belong in the same ship.
Re:Typical SuSE (Score:5, Insightful)
And don't I wish there were more companies with similar attitudes. When it comes to business ethics, American companies aren't exactly the most shining examples...
The end of Unix? (Not *nix) (Score:2, Insightful)
SCO is threatening to cancel IBM's license to distribute AIX. They have the ability to do this since they own the rights to the original Unix codebase. Could it be very long before they start going after the other Unix vendors?
Sun, SGI, IBM, and other Unix vendors are already throwing their support behind Linux in a lot of ways. Perhaps this will give them the added incentive to finally throw full support into Linux, in order to avoid being subject to the whim of a failing company that may or may not decide to blackmail them.
Of course, the end of Unix has been predicted for many years now, so maybe this will turn out to be nothing.
No, everyone else has licenses. (Score:3, Informative)
Piracy (Score:5, Interesting)
I think Doug Fairbanks might have something to do with it too, but I'm a little fuzzy on that part, so don't quote me.
Anyway, around the turn of the century, no, not *that* century. Ummmm, no, not that century either. 1700 to 1800. Various "states" in Northern Africa practiced actual piracy, capturing ships, ransoming the men on board or selling them into slavery if no ransom was paid.
Better yet, they could make a lot of money without any risk if they captured a few ships and then used the terror factor to demand *tribute* from other nations. The would be known as a "protection racket" if it were done on a smaller scale.
And it worked. Most of Europe caved in and payed the tribute. ( Not that the pirates didn't make the occasional "mistake" and sieze a lucrative looking prize anyway, but what the hell).
America held out. America had no Navy and no standing army. So they bloody well built them and went to war. In legitimate defense, of the world even (go figure). The modern Marine Corps was born out of this, and when the song mentions Tripoli this is the conflict it refers to.
The conflict lasted four years, but America, young, brash and still idealistic America, on its own, rid the world of these pirates.
Why am I going on about this?
Well, think about it, what is SCO doing right now?
Practicing true computer piracy, that's what. Demanding tribute on a claim that everyone knows is essentially bogus.
What do we do about it?
Well, an American congressman, in reaction to the demand for tribute from the pirates, made a statement that became the rallying cry in the war against the pirates of the Barbary Coast and an American policy for ever after ( well, at least until Reagan).
"Millions for defence. Not one damned penny for tribute."
That's the way to handle SCO. This is not a time to be "pragmatic" as the lawyer and the accountant see pragmatism.
At the very least SCO should be shunned and isolated. Compleat noncooperation throughout the entire industry. Ostracised in the literal sense. Banished to die in the wilderness. Call them Ishmael. SuSE shouldn't pull out of United Linux. SCO should be ejected.
But beyond that they should not be payed one single penny, not even to save millions in legal fees. They are pirates. They are demanding tribute AS pirates. They need to be crushed. Ultimately and completely.
Please. IBM, I implore you. Stay the course. Buy up what remains of their bloody legal corpse for fractions of a penny on the dollar *after* you have crushed them and reduced their value as a company to nil.
But not one damned penny for tribute.
KFG
Re:Piracy (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure it was President Andrew Jackson made this statement. Other than that, you pretty well cover the Barbary pirates situation, though you failed to mention that several European countries could have easily dealt with the problem, but refused to do so due to politics - much to the anger of many British naval officers who didn't like to see British sailors in slavery.
But I'm off-topic and will probably be moderated as such (and I deserve it).
Re:Piracy (Score:4, Funny)
I'm a Slashdot poster!! I'll probably never have that problem!
In other news ... (Score:5, Funny)
Its spokesman stated : 'With those #@$à3 guys there over at SCO, we didn't wanted anymore to have this acronym inside our name, so we just removed it'
Who'd blame 'em? (Score:3, Insightful)
That leaves Conectiva and SuSE, at least for now. The rest are business partners who are putting their names behind the UL effort, but many of them are on the "will SCO sue them next" list. Yeah, I'd like to go to a party where I know there's a good chance a certain jerk will want to pick a fight with me. No thanks...
The UnitedLinux effort, for all its hype and all the hope people (some, at least) put in it, is no doubt bruised all over the place by SCO's recent actions. And the incorrect perception that SCO owns UnitedLinux can't be helping the other Linux players who are participating in the project. I can only guess that some folks think SuSE and Conectiva are also evil, if only by association.
It's unfortunate that nobody at SCO thought about the trickle effect and what this lawsuit would do to its former allies "downstream". They've pulled some really stupid stuff in the past, but I truly think this time they've outdone themselves.
UnitedLinux may very well be a sinking ship.
Thanks for nothing, SCO.
Reevaluating their relationship with SCO (Score:2)
UnitedLinux is a scam (Score:2, Insightful)
*sigh* (Score:5, Funny)
Cue up the banjoes, boys. "The Beverly Hillbillies", if ya please.
o/~ Ooooooo...lemme tell a story 'bout a group called SCO,
they was havin' them some difficulty rakin' in the dough.
They was lookin' at th'marketplace, decidin' what to do
when they saw this li'l penguin an they figgered they would sue....
Big Blue that is. IBM. Deeeep pockets. Moola moooola....
So they filed them a lawsuit a couple billion deep
allegin' Blue had fed that bird through source code feature creep.
Blue an' Penguin shook their heads, an' marvelled at this feat,
sayin' "Not our faults you silly gits ain't able to compete..."
Squeezed by th'market. Billy Gates on one side, Torvaldes on t'other....squisha squish, yeah.
o/~
-- Horse_Pheathers
We must be all missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
does sco hire any techies? (Score:3, Interesting)
Time for SCO to die. . . (Score:2)
This lawsuit is SCOs last gasp for air before going under. IBM should use its muscle to put SCO under once and for all. Giving them any quarter will only fuel more lawsuits.
Linux was a bicycle (Score:3, Interesting)
Consider the history of SCO... (Score:5, Informative)
They just happened to purchase the rights to UNIX somewhere along the line (that somewhere being rather near the end).
The thing that worries me (Score:3, Insightful)
What SHOULD happen:
Small Scum-Bag Company A, with very little in the way of legitimate product or profits, files a ridiculously stupid lawsuit against Big Deep-Pockets Company B.
Big Deep-Pockets Company B uses their comsiderable financial and legal resources to win the case, crush Small Scum-Bag Company A and obtain a court ruling that deters future stupid lawsuits by other small scum-bag companies..
What ACTUALLY heppens:
Big Deep-Pockets Company B doesn't want to be bothered, so they have their insurance company send off a nice fat check to Small Scum-Bag Company A, which now is flush with cash and able to pursue other victims with its stupid lawsuits.
News Flash! Rambus and SCO to merge! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm rubber, you're glue (Score:4, Funny)
I love it when people get quoted not using their 'mass media language' :).
Re:They already dropped out. (Score:5, Insightful)
SuSE (Software Und SystemEntwicklung) is German.
Re:They already dropped out. (Score:2)
SuSE (Software Und SystemEntwicklung) is German.
And they have the sillyest acronym I've seen in years.
[OT] Re:ESR's Site? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: company tries to stay in business (Score:3, Insightful)
> So SCO is enforcing their IP. It's their call what they open source not IBM's.
Their business model isn't sound in the current environment. Only those vendors who sell UNIX to support their underlying hardware business are hanging in there right now.
And even those businesses' days may be numbered, unless they can convert themselves into service companies. It's getting hard to justify buying a Sun instead of an Athlon.
Re:Parallel with the United States (Score:2)
Impact?? (Score:3, Informative)
If you are permitted please write how this was initiated. I think the community is trying to access the impact of this lawsuit and even anecdotal evidence is of interest. Here is Linus' take. [mozillaquest.com]
Re:Impact?? (Score:3, Interesting)
But in response to your question, as the lead Linux developer for my company, my boss tasked me to research this and get back to him. Between Friday and Saturday I read this (provided by SCO) link:
http://www.sco.com/scosource/complaint3.06.03.htm
From this reading I informed my boss that in my opinion, this did not impact our Linux development. Most of the evidence listed by SCO in my (20+ years programming Apple/DOS/OS2/Win32/Unix/Linux) professional opinion, was speculative at best. They did not provide specific examples of IBM donating AIX code to the Linux kernel.
Concerning the few specific examples SCO listed, the Omni print driver and JFS. I pointed out the fact to my boss that both of these developments appeared in OS/2 long before Linux. Warp 3 and Warp 4 Server respectively.
Again, in my opinion SCO is only providing speculative evidence. It would not suprise me if the judge threw this case out of court in the preliminary hearing. If I find any further detailed information I will more than gladly email it to you.
Enjoy,
Re:Impact?? (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it was the owner of the company (my Boss) who initiated my research. We do ship a Linux (not GPL'd) product and he was curious about all the SCO press releases. He assumed it was a problem with us using GCC to compile our program.
The fact that is was your boss tells me that the "fall-out" from this might be a bit worse than hoped for.
Not at all. Anyone with an interest in Linux would be concerned with this case. We just have to sort out the fact from fiction.
Peace/Love/Linux,
Enjoy,
Re:I like SuSE but... (Score:3, Informative)
Each distribution has it's quirks. IMHO, YaST has been the best hardware detection tool/Linux setup program available out of all the distributions. I have to admit, the only one I have not tried is Debian. Slackware is my favorite, but as I get older and have less time, I tend not to want/desire to dick around with the system anymore. I just want it to work out of the box. SuSE does this on old hardware as well as new.
SuSE uses RPM as it's installation method. If you have a problem with dependencies, then it's RedHat's fault, not SuSE's. I've never had a problem with YaST connecting to any SuSE mirror (Since 6.4). I use a DSL/Cable modem to update, are you trying dial up? You can download the updates separately to your hard disk and burn them to CD.
upgrade from major version to major version
I would never recommend upgrading from a major Linux version to another. In my experience none of the Linux distributions get it right and neither does Microsoft. Config file formats change in between releases. Tarball your old config files and merge them after the installation.
As far as your SuSE configuration problem, edit the config files by hand all you want to. Just don't forget to run "/sbin/SuSEconfig" or the next time you run YaST, all your changes will be gone. You did remember to read the nice book SuSE ships with the distribution didn't you
Just kidding, YaST has it's quirks, but so does every other installation tool out there. Until there is a common Linux package distribution system (United Linux?), this is what we have to learn to live with in the mean time.
Enjoy,