Increased Linux Use With SCO's Defeat Predicted 280
twitter writes "The defeat of SCO's infamous copyright attack has Forbes wondering if a GNU/Linux boom is upon us. They discuss how this will benefit Novel, IBM, Chrysler, AutoZone and Red Hat. 'The SCO Group frightened potential business users away from Linux with lawsuits demanding billions in royalties. But the litigious company's claims were shot down in a ruling that will likely boost uptake of the operating system.'"
lol (Score:3, Funny)
"Is it safe to use Linux now?", they say timidly.
Re:lol (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What are some examples of what they offer that Linux does not for your usage pattern?
Re: (Score:2)
Application installation in Window and BSD have always been much more painless than apt/ubuntu/rpm/up2date/yum. In both cases t
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Ooh, I remember the year of the Linux desktop.
In fact, I seem to remember about 10 years of the Linux desktop, and not seeing a lot of Linux desktops.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not possible (Score:2)
Long live the Palm PDA!
Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (Score:4, Insightful)
SCO may have lost the battle, but it was already a victory for Microsoft no matter what happened. The war is far from over, but we'll win it by keeping on churning out our best software and leaving the FUD battles to the evangelists like Perens, ESR, RMS and others.
Here's the fact: Microsoft's actions prove that Linux and Free/Open Source Software scares it shitless!
Re: (Score:2)
Much the same as Novell and Linspire look to be setting themselves up to be...
Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO (Score:4, Informative)
If 235 legitinate patents were being infringed, Microsoft would be revealing specifically which ones are being infringed and how they are being infringed, if they were truly interested in protecting their "IP" rather than spinning FUD. It is obvious to all watching that all they care about is scare tactics and saber rattling.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that they wanted much more than FUD. Ideally they wanted to consolidate most of the rights to Linux, and to as much free software as possible in corporate hands where it could be neutralised using the same techniques MS have used to crush any number of would be competitors. The fact that this aspect failed dismally doesn't mean it wasn't a hoped for outcome.
There was some ho
Won't change a thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Did they?
Re: (Score:2)
That's what I was thinking. Did anyone actually cease using Linux or put off Linux adoption because they were afraid of SCO? I wasn't aware that people were taking SCO's claims that seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I work on embedded linux for a living, and all of the customers I have done work for switched from a "roll-their-own" (usually based on an existing freely-available distribution) model for their embedded solution to buying from RedHat or SuSE. The impression that investors and decision makers got was that it was worth the per-unit fee to go through one of them just to avoid the legal hassles down the road.
Now, though, I'm already transitioni
Re: (Score:2)
Whether or not the "thou shalt not use Linux" contingent in those companies will change their tune with this news, I do not know. My guess is they'll find another excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Won't change a thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
houston's ev1.net (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it should be a huge negative sum. Remember that all these "license fees" now belong to Novell. SCO does not have a dime. I hope they cannot pay their scum lawyers.
Also, I seem to remember a Sec invstigation into stock fraud against the SCO management. Maybe Darl will go to prison after all...
Re: (Score:2)
What this would also be good at would be invalidating Microsoft's and Sun's licenses since those were worth something like $25 million combined and these were directly used to finance SCO's fight against Linux.
LoB
Re: (Score:2)
Good question. In any case SCO has lost the money. They either have to give it back or give it to Novell. My bet would be that they have to give it to Novell and Novell then has the choice of giving the money back or granting li
FTA (Score:4, Funny)
The SCO Group did not return a call seeking comment on Monday.
Maybe their phones were disconnected for non-payment?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Either that, or there are no employees left there to answer them.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the problem was that they're in the process of moving.
Perhaps they're setting up shop in Lagos, Nigeria, so they can pay their creditors with $20,000,000 cashier's checks and ask them to send the change back to their post-office box.
I missed the boat (Score:2)
Dumb Dumb Dumb. It was like free money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The investment community decided that the case had no merit in 2004. You can see that in the
Grrrr (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Grrrr (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe Microsoft knew this was coming and want to lure Novell into an agreement so Novell would not go after Microsoft for it's involvement as SCO crumbled. Sort of like, here we will give you an agreement to make money if you don't come after us. If I was running Novell, I would take a hard look at my Microsoft agreement and it's real value.
SCO was partially owned by Microsoft at one point, is this the fate of companies who embrace MS? Seems to be a pattern here.
IBM will not be bought off so easily. L
Not the same SCO (Score:2)
The SCOundrels are what used to be Caldera, who bought Santa Cruz's Operating Systems Divison, and then changed their name to "The SCO Group" (SCO not apparently standing for anything).
After Santa Cruz sold off the OS Division, they changed their name to Tarantella, to reflect their major product at the time. Tarantella was bought by Sun about a year ago.
I agree with you though, ODT was a solid, if stodgy platform. We ported an artillery c
Reports of a Linux Boom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that worked out great for Apple.
Apple was falling flat on it's face at the same time it was giving out free goods to public schools. The few that stuck with Apple in their times of need are now helping to drive the Apple market with their expendable income since they're finally growing up a bit and not spending every spare dime down at the local bar. Apple is having mild success with a y
Re:Reports of a Linux Boom (Score:4, Interesting)
and what software for K-12 is not supported on Linux?
BTW, Apple did a pretty good job getting school kids familiar with its product. What happened was about a billion dollars in Microsoft marketing of FUD that Apple Mac was dead because Windows 95 made it obsolete. I was there and I had school teachers asking me about Windows PC's "because Apple was going out of business". There were no exploding Macs or anything like it, just millions and millions of Microsofts money going out to the press to spread the FUD. Apple survived by the skin of their teeth and even had to take money from Microsoft and agree to drop Netscape for a Mac version of MS Internet Explorer.
Linux and OSS are a perfect match for K-12. It's inexpensive, completely open for their learning experiences if that is what they want to do, it works. Atleast here in the US, school systems are constantly fighting for their budgets and floundering with expensive support of Microsoft Windows software and their hardware requirements.
LoB
SCO's products enough reason to use Linux (Score:2)
I think that the writing was on the wall for SCO long, long before this lawsuit got under way. The company I was working at back in 2000 had a number of boxes running SCO, presumably because they needed a *nix that ran on Intel x86 hardware. I remember looking through the godawful tangle of symlinks that was SCO's /etc directory and wondering why anybody would pay for it when the Debian build on my desktop seemed a lot more robust and did a better job of meeting my needs, for free. Seems I wasn't the on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, just had to get that off my chest...
Re: (Score:2)
Official response from SCO (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of the word transferred which implies ownership, use licensed. The SCO group is still confusing the facts by implying that ownership transferred. Remember, the royalty payments are badly in default with no liquid assets. Novell may soon own SCO code. Don't count on SCO making lots of money with this asset. They will likely forfet it
The rise of the commodty software (Score:2)
Requires cheap means of production (Score:2)
I guess Marx wanted to achieve that for all fields by socializing the means of production, but that did not work out because in many cases the tools are simply too expensive to give everyone a chance at playing with them. The result was management by bureaucracy and a less efficient economy than in capitalism.
If w
Joe User's association (Score:2, Interesting)
2. Novell does
3. Microsoft has an agreement with Novell
4. Therefore...
5.
Insert at #5 any meaningful answer that will prevent users from thinking that MS owns, or could claim to own, even the minimal part of Unix.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
SCO continues to thrash around. (Score:2, Informative)
The company is obviously disappointed with the ruling issued last Friday. However, the court clearly determined that SCO owns the copyrights to the technology developed or derived by SCO after Novell transferred the assets to SCO in 1995. This includes the new development in all subsequent versions of UnixWare up through the most current release of UnixWare and substantial portions of SCO UnixWare Gemini 64. Also, SCO owns the exclusive, worldwide license to u
Re: (Score:2)
No more sock puppets.... (Score:2)
They can't continue making public claims and not mitigate "damages" by pointing to a culprit and specifying THE EXACT lines of their code which they believe is in Linux. That will lead, of course, to the issue of the validity of their IP claims since most suffer severely from prior art.
Re: (Score:2)
Not so fast my friend (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not so fast my friend (Score:5, Insightful)
My point is: like it or not, public perceptions do alter the adoption of technology. This means that lawsuits (even if baseless) and media attention (even if belated) can and do affect adoption.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do you feel you need to draw a line in the sand. Grow up.
An injured animal (Score:2)
An injured animal might bite back even though it is doomed. Time to put it out of its misery.
Forbes right on top of last week (Score:3, Insightful)
The mouthpiece of conventional wisdom. I'm been seeing more interest in Linux stemming from the progress in Ubuntu development than anything.
I never got the impression that anyone choosing Windows over Linux was doing so because of the SCO case. It may have been just one more excuse but I can't think of a time it was the primary reason a customer picked .NET over a LAMP stack. YMMV, of course.
I believe we will see more interest in Linux, mainly because interest was already picking up, not because of this ruling. And that includes Linux on the desktop. Again, mainly because it makes a nice desktop, not because of this case.
If Microsoft loses share in the server or desktop market they've got no one to blame but themselves. Vista was a giant FUM-BLE at a time they really needed to hit one out of the park. If you don't mind me mixing sports metaphors. ;) But the big problems aren't related to Vista. Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.
Re:Forbes right on top of last week (Score:4, Interesting)
This is one of my big problems with the Linux community: You guys keep waiting for MS to fuck up.
Give me a reason to get rid of them first! Where is the software support, for one?
It actually makes me feel stand-offish about doing anything more with Linux knowing that they (as in the community) are waiting for someone else to fail enough to drive business their way instead of succeeding enough in their own right to give me a reason to look their way. Basing the value of your product on a competitors failures doesn't make me feel too confident. Endless stories of a new Linux revolution while the marketshare hardly creeps up doesn't make me feel too confident. The fact that major apps and games publishers are still taking a wait-and-see attitude towards Linux doesn't make me feel to confident.
For as much trash talk I hear about Vista around here I'm not seeing too much of it on the streets. The handful of Vista adopters I know don't seem to be having such a hard time with it and it seems that the situation is only getting better for Vista. And these guys aren't geeks, mostly. It's the fabled Joe Sixpacks I know who are adopting Vista. The geeks I know are sticking to XP. Even the biggest Linux advocate I know (whom I also respect his opinion) is running XP on his laptop and his main home desktop. As far as Linux goes he's still little more then a hobbyist. After talks with him I don't think he's going to switch to Linux as his main any time soon.
Give us a reason to switch. Don't wait for MS to file for Chapter 11. It's not going to happen anytime soon. As long as the Linux community and software publishers don't step up to the plate I don't think I'm going to see a time where I am forced to switch out of desperation.
So if the big plan in the community is to wait for the old guard to be weak, sick and feeble before they make their attack I'm afraid you guys are going to be hanging out in the bushes for a long long time. And no, talk of another wooden rabbit isn't going to do much to sway me. But I'll keep an eye open because it is mildly amusing.
Re: (Score:2)
Was that rhetorical? Seems like you can get Linux software support from IBM [ibm.com], Red Hat [redhat.com], Novell [novell.com], Canonical [ubuntu.com] and many others. This is in addition to the extensive free, community support, of course. The fact that you can actually "shop around" for your support when considering Linux is actually a huge advantage of FOSS over proprietary solutions (where typically you are stuck with a single vendor for support).
Re: (Score:2)
Linux isn't a company. There are over 12,000 programs in Ubuntu (as an example). That is over 12,000 programmers.
Your assumption that everyone is waiting for Microsoft to die is such a windows user point of view. Linux users that only use Linux never even THINK of Microsoft, its out of sight, its out of mind. The only time it ever comes up is when Microsoft start spewing BS about patents and that is it.
Why do you need a reason to switch? If you want to try it out then just do it! You can download
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a reasonably cool idea out there in some product that represents genuine innovation or a level of progress above and beyond Linux/Windows/MacO
Re: (Score:2)
All corporations spiral into blandness as soon as the guy that built it and kept telling everyone what to do leave. microsoft is ran by Bean counters now, nothing is important to microsoft other than profits. The men making the decisions are making them based on profits and not technology or innovation. This is why Microsoft is starting it's spiral into bla
Re: (Score:2)
This happened at my workplace. Of course the manager that bought into all of the FUD was an idiot and has since moved on to some other suckers. Once he left, Linux started to pick up much faster for us.
For us, that means the ruling will cause no change. Wherever that manager works now, however, it could make a difference.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Notice that they totally missed that Microsoft had put $15M into SCO for a UNIX license and Sun put in $10 million for their UNIX license. Now, it turns out that SCO does not own UNIX and though they were allowed to sell licenses, they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, SCO, for the riposte! (Score:3, Interesting)
To anyone claiming 'this changes nothing', you're overlooking a great opportunity. Practice this phrase with me:
"Yeah because that worked out GREAT for SCO!"
Now, prepare to use this move to any and all of the following objections:
A) Linux is full of stolen code, and using it means you'll get sued.
B) Linux suffers from tons of IP problems, and using it means you'll get sued.
C) Microsoft is going to sue you for using Linux.
The thing that SCO did for us was dismiss the 'forgone conclusion' that the ability to sue is equivilent to the ability to WIN said suit.
Having survived this beast makes for a stronger FOSS community, so long as we don't forget it. Of course with all the noise SCO and Darl made when they thought they were certain to win, that isn't too likely...
Thank you sirs!
Re: (Score:2)
I got that part, thanks.
And if Novell kills Linux, what exactly would they have left? Do you suppose they WANT to be Microsoft's lap dog? Because it would be either that or nothing. A non-Free Linux has no future.
Besides, Novell themselves have redistributed the code under GPLv2. As far as I know, they can't undo that nor can they remove the freedoms given after the fact.
If the crunchy bits of the code go GPLv3 this gets even more sticky.
My point, and the lesson learned from SCO: There's no slam-dunk he
Re: (Score:2)
I may be the only one that thought this, but I always assumed that SCO wanted to kill/absorb Linux in favor of their proprietary Unix. Their expensive, inferior product was dying a death of free markets and they wanted the law to bail them out.
If that's not your view of what SCO was seeking, please share.
Novell doesn't, as far as I know, have a viable product that is not Linux. Again, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that SuSE is what they're currently selling.
I don't see the parallel.
I am intrigu
Did any business take SCO seriously? (Score:2)
At first, some companies back in 2003 may have been scared of Linux because of the lawsuit, but later polls seem to suggest that the SCO lawsuit has done little to affect Linux adoption. Any company concerned about Linux would have had to do a little research to see the SCO scam for what it was. After all they sued Daimer Chrysler (one of their former customers) for doing little more than switching to Linux 7 years before the suit. And when they sued them, it was shown that SCO really had no reason, and
Re:Did any business take SCO seriously? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In Autozone, one of the things SCO is alleging is that Autozone could not have replaced their SCO Unix system with a Linux system without illegally using (or reverse-engineering) their libraries. The case was stayed pending the outcome of IBM, Redhat, and Novell. Now that it has been shown that Novell owns the Unix copyrights, it will limit what SCO can claim. To proceed, SCO would have to show that the libraries in question are under their copyrights and not Novell's or anyone else's. After all, a lot
The Forbes view of the world (Score:2)
Year of the Desktop? LOL! (Score:2)
Richard Stallman, your phone's ringing (Score:3, Funny)
From TFA:
Unix was developed by the old American Telephone & Telegraph. The company allowed the system to be copied, leading to multiple versions, some of which effectively leaked into the public domain. In the early 1990s, Linus Torvalds, then a college student in Helsinki, wrote a version of the program from scratch that he called Linux. Torvalds posted Linux on the Internet, allowing others to copy and improve upon it. The sytem became popular for use on servers as an alternative to Microsoft's Windows.
Yup, that's right, ol' Linus just sat down and cloned the entire Unix operating system from scratch. On his own. With no antecedents.
Yes, because they are Forbes. (Score:2, Insightful)
Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?
They are hardly, "right on the money", but at least one reporter there has woken up and it's better late than never. My hope is that this represents yet another company that's defecting from the M$ monopoly. Their defection would be remarkable when there is so much M$ advertising money at stake. The stock prices reported are accurate facts, their predictions are interesting because they h
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But in the meantime, it would also be confirmation to Microsoft that it's attacks are working, and thus encouragement to continue.
I do agree with you, though... seeing a usually pro-MS business publication being bullish on Linux really is something to celebrate. I can only hope that more (e.g. the WSJ) follow Forbes' lead.
What's the opposite of FUD? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What's the opposite of FUD? (Score:5, Interesting)
The general feeling on Groklaw seemed to be that, while SCO and BSF undoubtedly dragged their feet as long as they could, Judge Kimball (and to a lesser extend IBM) were happy to give them enough rope, simply to stop SCO from finding grounds for an appeal, and kicking the whole sordid mess off afresh again in size months time.
As it is, because SCO were given every possible chance to make their case, they are going to find it very difficult to go running to a higher court wailing "it's not fa-a-air!"
And that, I think, has to be a good thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What's the opposite of FUD? (Score:4, Insightful)
Think about the extreme opposite: a judge being able to rule within 5 minutes on complete bias.
The same goes with our governmental system- totalitarianism vs democracy. Yeah, the totalitarian government may be more efficient... but definitely less just.
And yes, it has to be that way to some extent. Could they put in provisions to help these crazy court cases? Perhaps, but there would still be a level of inefficiency in order to make room for justice.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What's the opposite of FUD? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, they did. And other experts, let us not forget, testified the opposite. Now to an industry insider, it's fairly obvious that Brian Kernighan's opinion is going to carry more weight than Jeffery Leitzinger's does (at least when it comes to computing). The trouble is that the courts don't know that, and cannot assume that one side's witness is better than that of the other.
Look, I really don't want to fight with you about this. If you're arguing that the US legal system is broken because it allowed BSF to file a gazillion timewasting motions and counter motions, then I think you may well be right. If you're arguing that Judge Kimball is broken, having allowed things to drag on so long, than I think you're probably not.
In any case, I don't have any great emotional investment in the issue. I'm not a US citizen, whatever problems may exist, they're not mine to solve. I'm just reporting what I've gleaned by lurking on Groklaw for the duration.
Who's "You"? (Score:2)
Who has accused Forbes, twitter? Or are you calling out Slashdot? Slashdot publishes all kinds of stories from all kinds of people who walk up and post. They're often contradictory, depending on the perspective of the submitter. Slashdot isn't a newspaper with an editorial board that decides it knows what the world is like, what's happening. It's a public printing press staffed by its readers.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure even Microsoft has enough money for that sort of bribe.
What Forbes is is naturally aligned to the Robber Baron. It's a publication for Robber Barons or would be Robber Barons. So it has a certain natural bias and a general cluelessness about the actual technical details if they aren't in the areas of finance.
Forbes is like your CEO.
Forbes is simply what would happen if Bill Gates created a magazine.
Re: (Score:2)
But I note that I didn't say that Forbes is a paid shill. I merely quoted that sentence from a post which in turn quoted an original post which said that about Forbes. The post I quoted accused the OP of saying "paid shill" as if Forbes' status had consequence, though someone (the OP'er or Slashdot itself) has said that Forbes' status has no consequence. An accusation that someone was being contradictory.
My post said nothing abou
Re: (Score:2)
But how do you know they're talking directly to twitter? Even if it's not front-paged, it's still published by Slashdot. Is there any evidence to believe that twitter fits the post's bill, having dismissed Forbes in the past, but now making a big deal of Forbes' current statements?
Re: (Score:2)
Linux chain reaction (Score:5, Insightful)
When did this happen? Viruses/spyware was one of the largest stimuli for me to finally suck it up and emigrate for good (I was under no circumstances going to reinstall XP or buy Vista). And I'm not alone. Now I've found that Ubuntu does everything I want it to do, my friends will be getting a taste too.
It would not surprise me in the slightest if we were to see Linux achieve double digit market penetration (i.e. 10%) within 2 years. It's kind of like being one of the first kids to play multiplayer Doom and then Quake. You think to yourself "Damn! This is fun! I wonder why everyone else isn't doing this?" And soon enough (given several years), everyone IS doing it. It spreads from person to person virally.
The phenomenon itself parallels atomic physics; as soon as you have on average every split atom triggering another atom to split, you get a chain reaction. This is the same with people and ideas, software (or human diseases). It's just that the chain reaction aspect seems less obvious to us because of the time scale. It might be 2 months before I get around to install Ubuntu on a friend's machine, whereas a neutron emitted from a nucleus will strike another atom on the other side of the bomb in much, much less than a second.
Ubuntu is mostly there. It is there enough that I believe if I installed it myself on a poweruser friend's computer, helped sort out some driver issues, he'd be able to take it from there with the occasional internet search. And it is better than MS in a lot of important areas: stability, security, efficiency (in Watts), ease of installing new software (Synaptic). Not having to worry about spyware or viruses is HUGE. And it's free, by emigrating you've permanently opted out of the eternal upgrade for $$$ cycle, along with acquiring a mental Unix toolkit that will enable further migrations if necessary (e.g. to BSD or other free ixes).
And it is the power users who are critical to this chain reaction. It's not grandma using mail and web who will be installing it on friend's computers. It is the power user. So by all means, get your grandma and girlfriend using it, but if you really care about adoption rates, find another power user and guide them through an installation. Note that something like Ubuntu is gold to a power user (someone who is doing free tech support for friends and family) because it has the potential of being much lower in maintenance. No finding new spyware removers, reinstalling, or any of that. Convert, done.
After that, it's just a matter of time before you have hardware manufacturers and gaming companies coming over too. Then it's over. Within a year you'll get everything of note imported or created. Be it photoshop or office, the bugs will be ironed out extremely quickly. Word will become like Wordperfect used to be. There will still be a few people whining "But word used to work so much better!", but they will be ignored.
Re:Linux chain reaction (Score:4, Interesting)
BTW, here is the report on how linux has THREE times as many security holes as Microsoft:
http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html [us-cert.gov]
We can take a Linux system, lock it down, and forget about it just like a Windows system. That is... if we want crappy infrastructure. Both systems require care and feeding. Both require more than a vendor is going to admit.
We have Unix / Linux folks who spend a good amount of time writing scripts and figuring out configurations for everyone else to follow. The same goes for the Windows side. I'm biased - I'm much more impressed with the extent of what we do on the Unix / Linux side of the house. But I am also occasionally surprised and impressed with what knowledgeable Windows admins come up with.
Of course, we also have aspects of our IT environment that are Windows-only who would never even dream of looking at anything that didn't come from Microsoft (or at least have Microsoft approval). But that doesn't mean Linux isn't making headway in our environment. And it doesn't mean that just because you're a Windows shop that others aren't.
By the way... I'd look a little closer at that report you're quoting. It's a much more complex story than those numbers would make it seem. There's the issue of how severe a flaw is. But even more basic is numbers that don't add up and flaws that are double-counted.
Re: (Score:2)
It was the year of fire, the year of destruction, the year we took back what was ours. It was the year of rebirth, the year of great sadness, the year of pain and a year of joy. It was a new age, it was the end of history, it was the year of Linux on the Desktop.
Sadly, I do think that we may be waiting until 2261 for that one to happen too.
Re: (Score:2)
And the tricks Microsoft played in backroom deals to help fund SCO was amazing. They paid SCO $16 million for a UNIX license? Sun, a company wh
Re: (Score:2)