no commentary on SCO v. Novell ?

[Kevin Fries]

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" <cryptworks at 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 <craigwhite at 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-discuss at lists.p...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20100403/6fd4726b/attachment.htm>