Re: DDoS or not? More lies or Incompetence?

From: Tony Lawrence (apl_at_shell01.TheWorld.com)
Date: 12/13/03 

Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:33:32 +0000 (UTC)

Peter Lemken <spam.for.the@buerotiger.de> wrote:
>Tony Lawrence <apl@shell01.theworld.com> wrote:

>> As I have said before, I believe that these people believe that
>> IBM stole their code. The only question I have (especially
>> after that initial release debacle) is "does SCO really know
>> the origin of the code?" IOW, is it really theirs?

>Do you really believe that, or do you just *want* to believe it? I can't

I really believe that.

>help feeling that Darl recognized that SCO cannot survive in the marketplace
>with the kind of products they have. For one reason or the other Darl
>decided to pull out of Linux and ended up seeing that he does not have
>enough developers at hand who could secure the future of an up-to-date
>product line that might seem as a viable alternative to MS, Linux or any
>other i386 UNIX.

I'd say that their tension with Unixware vs. Openserver was responsible
for a lot of their problems. Bringing a Linux product into the
mix (or a Linux company bringing Unixware and Openserver in, however
you want to look at it) just made things worse. But they never
have been very bright about where there markets are.

>Now that he alienated more or less the entire development community,
>including those without a job, it is rather clear that this company has no
>chance of survival on technical merits at all, quite on the contrary.

That isn't at all clear,no. But neither is it particularly important.
SCO's survival has been questionable for a long time, and had little
to do with technical merit. The really important thing here is what
damage is done to Open Source. Whether SCO has a case or not is
almost unimportant: damage has been done. If they actually do
have a case, and are able to win it (seemingly related things but
really not), the damage will be very serious, and the end result
will damage commercial Unix like SCO's right across the board.
Microsoft will reign supreme, Open Source will be a dirty word,
and nobody but the SOB's in Redmond will rejoice any of that. 

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

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Novell / OpenSuSE admit they paid protection money
    ... Will there be any damage with this deal for Linux and the open source ... A lot of Linux users around the world ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: what to do after "Touretzkeys book"?
    ... IBM has some Linux hackers, ... see what your point is and how you discount IBM's open source contributions. ... or some kernel device driver... ... generated by people who are paid to do the hacking. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Red Hat: Open Source News (fwd)
    ... Red Hat Open Source News ... To challenge the dominance of Microsoft's Windows PC operating system, ... Japan is promoting the Linux system in public schools. ... Open Source Law: Open source and the IT trade deficit ...
    (comp.os.linux.announce)
  • Serious information for parents taken in by stupid articles
    ... Windows XP professional, and Linux), my Dad teaches Linux at a nearby ... AOL takes up bandwidth, this means ... (most games ... How can a program physically damage the surface of a disk? ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: Check that out: THe Bottom Line: Software and copyright
    ... Undisclosed source code did NOT originate with Microsoft. ... to get Adobe Photoshop to work on Linux. ... Open source can be a misnomer, but in general, open source is a product of ... SCO can't be sold short ... ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)