What will happen to OpenServer...

[brian]

I was curious to see that SCO claimed a large company had purchased SCO
licences for Linux installations. SCO refused to reveal the name but
claimed it was a Fortune 500 company.

Anybody want to bet it was Microsoft?

Microsoft has already paid SCO a large but undisclosed sum to harass the
open source community, I mean to buy licence rights to a few fragments of
open source Unix code.

Microsoft also claimed to be running a Linux lab in order to understand it's
main competition better.

Microsoft is my guess at the mystery Fortune 500 client for the new Linux
licences - how better to maintain SCO's (meaning Caldera's) venture into
profit for the first time in it's history and funding the FUD campaign
against Linux.

So, what will happen to all of SCO's IP including OpenServer when the house
of cards comes crashing down? SCO doesn't have any significant creditors
(because it has no significant credit). Will it revert back to the majority
owner, The Canopy Group?

Just curious.

Brian

[Bela Lubkin]

[email]brian@english-bay.com[/email] wrote:

> So, what will happen to all of SCO's IP including OpenServer when the house
> of cards comes crashing down? SCO doesn't have any significant creditors
> (because it has no significant credit). Will it revert back to the majority
> owner, The Canopy Group?

Given OpenServer's large installed base, many loyal customers, and
continuing revenue, I personally expect that it will continue to be
developed and supported by _someone_ no matter what happens to its
current owners. It would be personally convenient to me if this came to
pass the simplest way, by continuing as the current SCO. But whether or
not that happens, I expect that OpenServer _will_ emerge from the
current chaos.

>Bela<

[brian]

Ed Hooper wrote:

> Even though I am a Linux user and do not agree with SCO's
> current actions, I do not believe the previous post was
> appropriate for this usenet news group.

> I will get off my soapbox now. <stumble> <trip> <crash> Ouch!

Thanks Ed - appreciate the humor.

I tried to find the most apropriate newsgroup to post my thoughts and
inquiries but could not find a sco.discussion group so sco.misc was the
least objectional venue.

I am a Linux user since '95 and now deploy Slackware Linux in both the
server closet and now the desktop - my customers read some of the stuff
being put out by SCO and it causes them concern, which they wish to share
with me.

Considering the fraud and extortion being perpetrated by The SCO Group
against my clients and me, I think it only fair that I be allowed to share.

The SCO Group is doing everything it can to create an atmosphere of Fear
Uncertainty and Doubt concening Linux and the open source community.

The SCO Group has become a culture of thieves, liars and extortionists.
Their arguments against the GPL are so much fluff and gossimer, the
"smoking gun' is nothing of the sort. As a matter of fact, some of the code
they showed at the SCO Forum has been appropriated by SCO and striped of
it's legitimate copyright notices - they aren't even the legitimate owners!

Now I know that most of the individuals in this NG are not employees of The
SCO Group but you as a group do have influence.

I have already succeeded in moving two clients off SCO networked accounting
systems and I am encouraging all my associates to do likewise - how else
are we to fight this calculated and directed attack against our beliefs and
livelyhood.

It is true there may be more important issues over the horizon but quite
frankly this problem is immediate, front & center - The SCO Group is
attacking the GPL, Linux and the entire open source community with
falsified 'evidence' and bogus legal theories. As a direct result of it's
actions, The SCO Group will very likely succumb to massive legal and
financial pressure, it can only sell it's IP to Microsoft so often before
Microsoft will bend them over like they have done with every other
undesireable partner. Can you say 'Corel'?

So unless you guys have the sourcecode to SCO's beknighted Unix and
permission to distribute it, just what are you guys gonna do when it all
comes crashing down?

Brian
Network Services
Vancouver, Canada

[tony@aplawrence.com]

brian <brian@english-bay.com> wrote:

>So unless you guys have the sourcecode to SCO's beknighted Unix and
>permission to distribute it, just what are you guys gonna do when it all
>comes crashing down?

Well, some (most?) of us have been expecting SCO to go belly up for
years, so have developed other revenue streams.

But even if the company does fold, SOMEBODY will buy up the dregs,
because there is just too much revenue opportunity from upgrades
and, believe it or not, new sales, to throw away.

--
[email]tony@aplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]

[Brian]

Scott wrote:

> [email]tony@aplawrence.com[/email] wrote:

>>But even if the company does fold, SOMEBODY will buy up the dregs,
>>because there is just too much revenue opportunity from upgrades
>>and, believe it or not, new sales, to throw away.

> I'm interested in this; why would anyone actually want to buy any
> SCO products or upgrades any more? Isn't it a dead end? From my
> own experience, their software is extremely outdated now, relying
> upon GPL'ed products to provide much of the functionality. It's
> also extremely expensive compared to the alternatives (which more
> than match its performance and stability).

In moving my clients away from SCO, the great difficulty was legacy
accounting/POS applications. The supplier of one custom POS system were
already experimenting with Linux so that won't be a problem. The other
account had a considerable investment in a customized accounting system - I
managed to move them over to a different accounting system made by ACCPAC
on Linux.

The big problem is, nobody loves change. It is difficult to explain to a
client that their Unix supplier has gone mustang and is now perpetuating a
scam that will result in the dissolution of the company in short order. It
is a lot of explaining and in the end the client either trusts you or they
don't.

In the end, Linux is a far superior platform for growth, support and
economy. I can't imagine anyone developing new projects for SCO Unix and
many legacy products are probably being fast-tracked over to either Linux
or FreeBSD.

As for SCO being DoSed - I think whoever is doing it should stop
immediately. You have made your point but you are now only fueling Darl &
Chris' pissing and moaning about the evil Linux hacker community. These
guys are talking themselves into insolvency and unemployment - they are the
Pariah of the IT community and will never get a job running a Radio Shack
after this fiasco.

Brian

[Simon Hobson]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:53:11 +0100, [email]tony@aplawrence.com[/email] wrote
(in message <bictb7$b73$1@pcls4.std.com>):

>> I'm interested in this; why would anyone actually want to buy any SCO
>> products or upgrades any more? Isn't it a dead end? From my own
>> experience, their software is extremely outdated now, relying upon
>> GPL'ed products to provide much of the functionality. It's also
>> extremely expensive compared to the alternatives (which more than
>> match its performance and stability).

>
>
> Because change is often expensive and difficult. Many of the
> SCO machines are running very specific software that may or may not
> be able to run on other platforms, may require re-purchase or
> upgrade if it does, may require re-programming, etc.
>
> SCO boxes generally are not just file and print servers. I'm
> sure the very few web/mail servers were replaced long ago, but
> the app servers aren't always so easy.

Exactly, many of these systems will be in the "choose the software, then
choose from the supported OSs to run it on" category. At work we use
OpenServer for our accounting/erp/etc system because we chose the software,
and the choice of OS was OpenServer or NT - we already had a box running
OpenServer so it made sense to stick with it as we could run both the new
software and the old package side by side on one box.

Our dealer has tried to persuade us to switch to NT, and my reply to
management was along the lines of "if you want to, but don't expect me to
support it or re-write all my bits of support code in Visual basic".

At the next software upgrade, Linux becomes an option, and that is my
reccommended route - for a number of technical reasons, not just politics and
cost. But until then, we either use OpenServer or spend a LOT of money
switching to AIX or Windoze.

Simon