[Linux-aus] Re: Statement on SCO

[Con Zymaris]

On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 10:25:10PM +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > >  What is wrong with Microsoft purchasing a Unix licence from SCO?
> > 
> > because their actions are a clear-and-present act of belligerence. 
> 
> How on Earth so? Seriously, where is some relevant and reliable evidence
> that suggests Microsoft are indirectly funding SCO or helping them out? I'm

Where did I state that Microsoft are funding SCO?

> flabbergasted that everyone is squealing like children about this. We don't
> have to -> we're better than that.

My point is that until Microsoft stepped up to the plate to render moral 
support to SCO, no other major IT firm was saying a good word about them.
 
Microsoft buys into the argument, and suddenly SCO are saying 'look, we 
told you we had valuable IP rights. In fact, they are so valuable that 
Microsoft has signed an agreement with us, vindicating our attack on 
Linux.' Cluelessly aimed red herring? Yes. Effective? Maybe. Thus the 
posited counter-argument.

> 
> > Remember, Microsoft have been purloining Unix/BSD code for years. Their 
> > current Unix Services product includes copious quantities of GPL code. Do 
> > you hear them sending out press-releases globally to alert the world to 
> > this fact? Not a chance.
> 
> Remember also that Caldera's previous target was none other than...
> Microsoft. Ever considered the fact that MS would prefer *not* to ship GPL
> code, and would be happier to base their SFU products on "the real thing"?

Jeff, go and check out what Microsoft are including in SFU. I think you'll
find that there is little on offer from SCO Unix which can match the
quality of the GPL offerings.

> 
> The fact is, we don't know, it's all conjecture, and we just look like kids
> pointing at the bogeyman in the closet everytime we complain that Microsoft
> is "being unfair". We're better than that.

The aforemention item was an example raised within the confines of the LA 
mailing list. At no point did I suggest that we run with it publicly.

However, the timing of the Microsoft deal with SCO cannot be excused so
lightly. Remember, Microsoft aren't including pieces of the Linux kernel in
SFU, so SCO's recent rants about IP issues with Linux are not what's
causing Microsoft to suddenly sign a deal. Tactically, the only motivator 
is maximal damage point scoring off Linux, which I believe can be 
counter-argued effectively.

con

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
Con Zymaris <conz at cyber.com.au> Level 4, 10 Queen St, Melbourne 03 9621 2377 
Cybersource: Unix/Linux, TCP/IP and Web App. Development  www.cyber.com.au