no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?

[Craig White]

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.